Mr. J. Sahoo, Sr. Advocate v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Baripada And Another
High Court
25 Nov 2024 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisnc
Parties
Mr. J. Sahoo, Sr. Advocate v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Baripada And Another
Date of order
25 Nov 2024
Assessment year(s)
2016-17
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Mr. J. Sahoo, Sr. Advocate v. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Baripada And Another, the High Court (2024) decided the matter.
Decision: 5.The writ petition is disposed of.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No. 13693 of 2024
Collector and Chairman, Indian Red Cross Society, Mayurbhanj
….
Petitioner
– Represented By Adv.
Mr. J. Sahoo, Sr. Advocate
-versus-
Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Baripada and another
….Opp. Parties
–Represented By Adv.
Mr. A. Kedia, Jr. Standing
Counsel
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO
ORDER
25.11.2024
Order No.
03.
1.Mr. Sahoo, learned senior advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is assessment order dated 30[th] March, 2024 containing, inter alia, demand of tax and penalty pertaining to assessment year 2016-17. He submits, initially show cause notice dated 15[th] March, 2024 was issued in respect of the
assessment year, requiring reply by 20[th] March, 2024. His client complied before time by their reply dated 18[th] March, 2024. However, another notice under section 143(2) read with section 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for assessment) was issued on 27[th] March, 2024, pertaining to same assessment year, resulting in impugned assessment order passed on 30[th] March, 2024, earlier scheduled to be the date of hearing. He submits further, the notice for, inter alia, reassessment required reply to be submitted in less than 24 hours.
2.Mr. Kedia, learned advocate, Junior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of revenue and submits, counter has been filed. Petitioner has filed rejoinder.
3.On perusal of materials on record we do find that the notice dated 27[th] March, 2024 issued under section 143(2) read with section 147 required reply to be filed in less than 24 hours. Since the notice was digitally issued, time of issuance is reflected and time to file reply given as direction in the letter. It amounts to a situation where it cannot be said that petitioner was afforded due opportunity of hearing.
4.Impugned assessment order is set aside and quashed. Petitioner has till 12[th] December, 2024 to file reply to the notice dated 27[th] March, 2024. The authority will proceed to consider the
reply and pass assessment order. It is made clear, in event no reply is
filed on or before 12[th] December, 2024, impugned assessment order will stand automatically restored.
5.The writ petition is disposed of.
(Arindam Sinha)
Judge
(M.S. Sahoo)
Judge
Gs/Radha
Signature Not Verified
Digitally SignedSigned by: RADHARANI JENAReason: AuthenticationLocation: OHCDate: 25-Nov-2024 17:45:23
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.