Date Of Order : 28.08.2017 In Wp v. The Income Tax Officer & Anr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THLS THE 28 DAY OF AUGUST, 2017 | BEFORE THE HON’BLE Dr.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARL WRIT PETITION No.30960 OF 2016 (T-IT ) BETWEEN MR. MAHAVEERCHAND|S/O MR. VASTIMAL|AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,PRESENTLY RESIDING AT NO.18/7/1R.V.COMPLEX,KUMBARPET MAIN ROAD,BANGALORE-560002. . PETITIONER (BY SRI. PRADEEP KUMAR J., ADVOCATE FORSRI. HARISH V.S., ADVOCATE). AND 1.THE INCOME TAX OFFICER|WARD 3(3), UNITY BUILDING ANNEXEWARD 3(3), UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE MISSION ROAD,BANGALORE-56007 7.BANGALORE-56007 7. 2 |THE INCOME TAX OFFICER|WARD-5 (2)(2), BMTC COMPLEX,WARD-5 (2)(2), BMTC COMPLEX, % FLOOR, ROOM NO.306_ KORAMANGALA 6 BLOCK|BANGALORE-560095.BANGALORE-560095. .. RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JEEVAN J. NEERALAGI, ADVOCATE) | Date of order : 28.08.2017 in WP No.30960/2016.Mr. Mahaveerchand vs. The Income Tax Officer & Anr.,| 2/5) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 276)AND 22/7 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHTHE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE R-2 U/S|250 R/W SECTION 147 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, DATED|29.03.2016 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-086 I.E., ANNX-KAND CONSEQUENTIAL NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED BY THE R-2)U/S 156 OF THE IT ACT DATED 29.03.2016 FOR THE|ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 I.E., ANNX-L AND ETC. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE|COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER Mr. Pradeep Kumar., Adv. for Mr. Harisn V.S., Adv. for Petitioner. Mr. Jeevan J. Neeralagi, Adv. for Respondents. 1.Tnough the present petition is directed against anassessment order passed py the respondent-Assessing|Authority for the Assessment Year 2007-08, the same hasbeen assailed in the present petition merely on the ground|of non-compliance with the principles of natural justice, inas mucn as the statement of a third party-Mr.MukesnChoksi whnicn was relied on by the respondent-AssessingAuthority, Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(2), Bengaluru,|was not even supplied to the petitioner and ne was never| Date of order : 28.08.2017 in WP No.30960/2016.Mr. Mahaveerchand vs. The Income Tax Officer & Anr.,| 3/5| allowed the opportunity to cross-examine that witness to)bring forth the truth in his statement. 2DOn the last occasion, the respondents’ counsel wasdirected to produce the original assessment records of the)said Assessing Authority to verify the said contentionraised on behalf of the petitioner. Accordingly, the learned |counsel for the respondent-department has produced the)said record and he has fairly submitted that though theauthorized representative of the petitioner appeared before|tne Assessing Authority during the proceedings, but there)is no specific mention in the order sheet entries of the)Assessing Authority that the copy of the said statement ofMr. Mukesh Choksi was supplied to the petitioner or he|was allowed an opportunity to cross-examine Nim.| ‘3.In these circumstances, apparently there is an.admission on the part of the Assessing Authority, that thepetitioner or his authorized representative was not allowed the opportunity to cross-examine the revenue’s prime. Date of order : 28.08.2017 in WP No.30960/2016.Mr. Mahaveerchand vs. The Income Tax Officer & Anr.,| 4/5| witness on whose statement tne entire assessment order|making additions in the declared income of the assessee is_based. Consequently, the impugned assessment order)deserves to be quasned on this sole ground. 4This Court does not express any opinion on tnemerits of the case or otherwise and it is left free to the!Assessing Authority to re-frame the assessment in)accordance with law, after complying with the principles ofnatural justice in the aforesaid manner by supplying a copy|of the statement of Mr.Mukesh Choksi to the petitionerforthwith and allow him an opportunity of cross-examining|the said witness by the petitioner or his authorized)representative. Date of order : 28.08.2017 in WP No.30960/2016.Mr. Mahaveerchand vs. The Income Tax Officer & Anr.,| 4/5| witness on whose statement tne entire assessment order|making additions in the declared income of the assessee is_based. Consequently, the impugned assessment order)deserves to be quasned on this sole ground. 4This Court does not express any opinion on tnemerits of the case or otherwise and it is left free to the!Assessing Authority to re-frame the assessment in)accordance with law, after complying with the principles ofnatural justice in the aforesaid manner by supplying a copy|of the statement of Mr.Mukesh Choksi to the petitionerforthwith and allow him an opportunity of cross-examining|the said witness by the petitioner or his authorized)representative. 5.Witn these observations, the petition isallowed.The.impugnedassessment,./+. Annexure-Kdated 29.3.2016is quashed and set aside. For fresh)proceedings, the petitioner-assessee or his authorized)representative are directed to appear before the Assessing Date of order : 28.08.2017 in WP No.30960/2016.Mr. Mahaveerchand vs. The Income Tax Officer & Anr.,| 5/5) autnority in the first instance on18.9.2Q01and a period| Of|six montnsis allowed to the said Assessing Authority|to complete the fresh assessment for the Assessment Year. 2007-08 In accordance witn law. Tnere is no order as to costs. CK] Sd/-—JUDGE