Shreesatya Metal & Alloys Private Limited v. Assistant/Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 5(1), Kolkata & Ors

17.10.2023Item Nos.10 RP/AN Ct. No.1 FMA 775 of 2023 + IA No.CAN 1 of 2023 Shreesatya Metal & Alloys Private Limited Vs.Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,Circle 5(1), Kolkata & Ors. Mr. Abhratosh Majumder, sr. adv. Mr. Avra Majumder Mr. Ramesh Kumar Patodia Ms. Megha Agarwal Mr. Kaushik Roy Mr. Samrat Das Ms. Illina Dey …..for the Appellant Mr. Prithu Dudhuria …..for the respondents 1.This intra-Court appeal is directed against the orderdated 21[st] June, 2023 passed in WPA 12586 of2023. In the writ petition the appellant hadchallenged the assessment order passed underSection 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated27[th] July, 2022 for the assessment year 2016-2017primarily on the ground of violation of principles ofnatural justice. Several grounds were taken in thewrit petition challenging the said order andconsequential proceedings primarily on the groundthat there has been violation of principles of naturaljustice.dated 21[st] June, 2023 passed in WPA 12586 of2023. In the writ petition the appellant hadchallenged the assessment order passed underSection 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated27[th] July, 2022 for the assessment year 2016-2017primarily on the ground of violation of principles ofnatural justice. Several grounds were taken in thewrit petition challenging the said order andconsequential proceedings primarily on the groundthat there has been violation of principles of naturaljustice. 2.We have elaborately heard the learned senioradvocate for the appellant and perused the materialsplaced on record. We find that at every stage of theadvocate for the appellant and perused the materialsplaced on record. We find that at every stage of the matter there has been violation of principles ofnatural justice. However, for the purpose of disposalof this appeal we need not to record all this fact butsuffice to note that though personal hearing throughvideo conferencing was scheduled to be held on 19[th]May, 2023 by intimation date 17[th] May, 2023 butthe assessing officer thought it fit to intimate theappellant on 25[th] February, 2023. Thereafter, noopportunity was granted to the appellant to makesubmission in person or through video conferencing.Thus, we sufficiently hold that there has beenviolation of principles of natural justice. Theappellant has pleaded before the authority thatopportunity may be granted to the appellant to putforth its submission. However, this appears to havenot been done and the assessing officer has alsoproceeded to complete the assessment and thepenalty proceeding has also been initiated. Thus,we have satisfied that the writ petition should beheard on merits after affidavits are filed by therespondent or at least the respondent may be heardin the matter with regard to the technical objectionraised by the appellant. Therefore, we are inclinedto interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly,the appeal is allowed and the order passed in thewrit petition is set aside and the writ petition isrestored to the file of the learned single Bench. The respondent is directed to file affidavit-in-oppositionwithin six weeks from date. Reply, if any, be filedwithin two weeks thereafter. 3.List the writ petition before the Single Bench after aperiod of eight weeks and till the first hearing of thewrit petition is commenced by the learned SingleBench, the order impugned in the writ petition asalso all consequential proceeding shall remainstayed.period of eight weeks and till the first hearing of thewrit petition is commenced by the learned SingleBench, the order impugned in the writ petition asalso all consequential proceeding shall remainstayed. (T. S. SIVAGNANAM) CHIEF JUSTICE (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)