Gayatri Traders v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNACivil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6427 of 2022 ====================================================== Gayatri Traders through its Proprietor Nitu Devi, W/o Deepak Kumar, aged39 years, Female, resident of Village- Deepnagar, Post and P.S.- Deepnagar,District- Nalanda, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1.The Union of India through the Principal Chief Commissioner, Income Tax(Bihar and Jharkhand), Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna.(Bihar and Jharkhand), Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna. 2.The Principal Chief Commissioner, Income Tax (Bihar and Jharkhand),Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna.Revenue Building, Bir Chand Patel Path, Patna. 3.The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2 (3), Biharsharif, Nalanda. 4.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless AssessmentCentre, Delhi.Centre, Delhi. ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================Appearance :For the Petitioner/s: Mr.Alok Kumar @ Alok Kr Shahi, Advocate For the Respondent/s: Mr.Additional Solicitor General Mr. Rishi Raj Sinha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMARORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 20-06-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner has prayed for following relief:- Our attention is invited to the impugned order dated11.03.2022 (Annexure 8 page 141) wherein it stands recordedthat petitioner had neither responded to the notice to showcause nor placed on record any material in support of thecontentions leading to the passing of the impugned order. This statement is factually incorrect, for as is evidentfrom document (page 22), petitioner had submitted itsresponse on 5[th] of March, 2022 itself, which fact perhapsescaped the attention of the assessing officer. Learned counselpoints out that consideration of such response would have had abearing on the outcome of the proceeding of assessment. Well, we do not express any opinion thereupon leavingit open to the assessing officer to consider the factual matrix.However, we are of the firm view that the material placed onrecord by the petitioner, relevant or not, ought to have beendealt with in accordance with law. Passing of an order of assessment has entailed civilconsequences inasmuch as income stands re-assessed andunexplained expenditure amounting to Rs.2,44,51,035/- stands computed into the petitioner’s income for the relevant year. Shri Rishi Raj Sinha, learned counsel, states thatopportunity shall be afforded to the petitioner to placeadditional material by opening the Portal. Statement accepted and taken on record. As such, on this short ground alone, we quash and setaside the orders dated 11.03.2022 (Annexure 8 page 141)leaving it open for the assessing officer to pass a fresh order inaccordance with law. Liberty reserved to the petitioner to take recourse tosuch remedies as are otherwise available, should the need soarise subsequently. The instant petition stands disposed of. Interlocutory application(s), if any, shall also standdisposed of. (Sanjay Karol, CJ) ( S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- Ranjan AFR/NAFRNAFRCAV DATENAUploading Date23.06.2022Transmission DateNA