Mr. R.p. Kar, Advocate v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Odisha & Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 30939 of 2022 Golekha Bihari Aich …. Petitioner Mr. R.P. Kar, Advocate -versus- Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Odisha & Others ….Opposite Parties Mr. T.K. Satapathy Sr. Standing Counsel, IT Department Order No. 02. CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE M.S. RAMAN ORDER 08.02.2023 1. Notice. Mr. T.K. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the I.T. Department accepts notice for the Opposite Parties. 2. The challenge in the present petition is to a reassessment order dated 27[th] March, 2022 passed by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (Opposite Party No.3) under Section 147 of the Act read with section-144(B) of the Income Tax, 1961 (Act). A short ground on which the challenges has been raised is that the impugned order was not preceded by a draft assessment order, which is required to be served on the Assessee under Section 144(B) of the Act. 3. The show cause notice preceding the reassessment order was not accompanied by such draft assessment order. Balaram 4. The issue is no longer res integra as far this Court is concerned. In several judgments it has been held that the above provision which was inserted with effect from 1st April, 2021 has to be mandatorily complied with. A sampling of such orders includes the order dated 1[st] October, 2021 of this Court in W.P.(C) No.29279 of 2021 (Sribasta Kumar Swain v. Union of India), the orders dated 11th July, 2022 and 27th October, 2022 of this Court in W.P.(C) No.14008 of 2022 (Kshamta Foundation, Sundargarh v. Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, New Delhi),the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in R/Special Civil Application No.7370 of 2021 (Enviro Control Private Limited v. National E.Assessment Centre) and the judgment dated 30th September, 2022 Page 3 of 3 of the Madras High Court in W.P.(C) No.16373 of 2022 (P.T. Lee Chengalvaraya Naicker Trust, Chennai v. Income Tax Officer). 5. In that view of the matter, the impugned assessment order and the consequential demand notice are hereby quashed. This will, however, not prevent the Department from proceeding afresh in accordance with law hereafter. 6. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction (Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice (M.S. Raman) Judge