Lakshmi v. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner Of Incometax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.10.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR W.P.No.23084 of 2021 &WMP.No. 24309 of 2021 1. Anbalagan Pandian 2. Lakshmi ... Petitioners Vs. 1. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. 2. National Faceless Assessment Centre Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Delhi. ...Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitutionof India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to callfor records and quash the Assessment Order dated 22.09.2021bearing No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1035793218 (1) andconsequential Demand Notice dated 22.09.2021 bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/156/2021 22/1035793269 (1) passed by RespondentNo.1 and consequently direct the respondents to providepersonal hearing to the petitioner Nos.1&2 in the proceedingsunder show cause notice dated 06.09.2021 under Section 144 ofthe Income Tax Act, 1961 Vide DIN:ITBA/AST/F /144(SCN)(F)/2021-22/1035324673(1). For Petitioner : Mr.S.ManurajFor Respondents: Mr.ANR.Jayapratap Junior Standing Counsel https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ORDER Captioned main writ petition has been filed assailing anAssessment Order dated 22.09.2021 bearing referenceNo.ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1035793218(1) made under Section 147read with Sections 144 and 144 B of 'the Income-tax Act, 1961(43 of 1961)' [hereinafter 'IT Act' for the sake of brevity]pertaining to the assessment year 2014-15 qua a privatelimited company which went by the name 'Speed & Safe FreightSystems India Private Limited'. This assessment order shallfrom hereon be referred to as 'impugned order' for the sake ofconvenience and clarity. 2. This Court is informed that aforementioned PrivateLimited Company has been struck off on and from 25.10.2019 andthe two writ petitioners, who were Directors in the PrivateLimited Company, have laid the challenge qua impugned order. 3. The circumstances under which the two writpetitioners, who are spouses, joined together and assailed theimpugned order has been articulated in paragraph 2 of the writaffidavit and it may not be necessary to allude to the same inthe light of Section 179 of IT Act. 4. Be that as it may, learned counsel for writ petitionerMr.S.Manuraj submits that a notice under Section 148 of ITAct dated 07.08.2019 was followed by a notice under Section142 (1) of IT Act dated 02.02.2021. It may not be necessary totrace the trajectory of the proceedings thereafter and it willsuffice to straight away refer to a show-cause notice dated06.09.2021 bearing reference No.ITBA/AST/F/144(SCN)(F)/2021-22/1035324673(1), which has been issued under Section 144 ofIT Act as the crux and gravamen of the writ petitioners'campaign against the impugned order is posited and pivoted onthe response to the show cause notice (SCN) and technicalglitch which came in the way of response to this SCN. Atypical screen-shot qua response to said SCN as placed beforethis Court is as follows: 5. A perusal of the aforementioned home page reveals thatthere is no provision for personal hearing, though it is therein the model web page, more importantly, the response of thewrit petitioner had not been uploaded and the impugned orderhas been made on the basis that the writ petitioners have notresponded. 6. Mr. ANR. Jayapratap learned Revenue Counsel acceptednotice on behalf of both the respondents. 7. Owing to the short point on which captioned writpetition now turns, with the consent of learned counsel onboth sides, main writ petition was taken up. 5. A perusal of the aforementioned home page reveals thatthere is no provision for personal hearing, though it is therein the model web page, more importantly, the response of thewrit petitioner had not been uploaded and the impugned orderhas been made on the basis that the writ petitioners have notresponded. 6. Mr. ANR. Jayapratap learned Revenue Counsel acceptednotice on behalf of both the respondents. 7. Owing to the short point on which captioned writpetition now turns, with the consent of learned counsel onboth sides, main writ petition was taken up. 8. Learned Revenue Counsel submits that there is noinfirmity qua show cause notice dated 06.09.2021 as it hasresorted to Best judgement method under Section 144 of the ITAct. Learned counsel also submits that personal hearing is notstatutorily imperative and the writ petitioners, not havingsought for personal hearing, cannot now project the same as anargument in their challenge qua impugned order. 9. Therefore, the above leaves us with one point and thatis writ petitioners' response not getting uploaded. This maywell have been owing to the volume of the document, but it isnot possible to say anything with specificity owing to thisbeing Faceless Assessment and owing to the artificialintelligence that is being deployed is learned Revenuecounsel's further say. Be that as it may, the fact of thematter is, the writ petitioners' response did not get uploadedand it is necessary that the same has to be looked into beforean assessment order is made pursuant to said SCN under Section144 of IT Act which is a resort to the Best judgement method. 10. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view thatthis is a fit case to send the matter back to the secondrespondent by setting aside the impugned order (withoutexpressing any view or opinion on the merits of the matter)with a directive to redo the assessment from the SCN stage. Tobe noted, the proceedings post said SCN dated 06.09.2021 willstand effaced. The following order is passed: (a) Impugned order, being order dated22.09.2021 bearing No. ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1035793218 (1) and consequential Demand Noticedated 22.09.2021 bearing No. ITBA/AST/S/156/2021-22/1035793269 (1) are set aside solely on theground that writ petitioners' response to SCNdated 06.09.2021 under Section 144 of IT Act wasnot uploaded owing to a technical glitch;(b) In the light of aforesaid limb of thisorder, though obvious it is set out for thepurpose of clarity and specificity that this Courthas not expressed any view or opinion on thehttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/merits of the matter qua assessment; (c) The respondents shall now redo the matterfrom the 06.09.2021 SCN stage i.e., show causenotice under Section 144 of IT Act;(d) The writ petitioners shall upload theirresponse to the 06.09.2021 SCN within a fortnightfrom today i.e., on or before 11.11.2021;(e) The respondents shall consider theresponse of the writ petitioners i.e., response to06.09.2021 SCN and complete assessment on its ownmerits and in accordance with law, within sixweeks therefrom i.e., on or before 23.12.2021. 11. Captioned writ petition is disposed of with thedirectives adumbrated supra. Consequently, captioned WMPs aredisposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs. //True Copy// Assistant Registrar (CS-IX) nst/gpa 1. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of IncomeTax Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi. 2. National Faceless Assessment Centre Income Tax Department, Ministry of Finance, Government of India,Delhi. +1cc to Mr.S.Manuraj, Advocate, S.R.No.55894 NRL(CO)SB(23/11/2021) W.P.No.23084 of 2021 &WMP.No.24309 of 2021