Wp/10046/2022 Of Gauthamchand Mohanlall v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 25.04.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR W.P.NO.10046 OF 2022ANDW.M.P.NOS.9751, 9752 & 9757 OF 2022 Mr.Gauthamchand Mohanlall ... Petitioner .Vs. 1. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,Delhi – 110 003.2. The Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 1 (2),Income Tax Department,No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. 3. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1,Chennai,Income Tax Department,121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai – 600 034. ... Respondents PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia, praying for issuance of a Writ of CertiorarifiedMandamus, to call for the records of the Writ Petitioner Companyon the file of the First Respondent to quash the impugned orderdated 30.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144 and 144B of the Actfor the Assessment year 2015- 16 in ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1042139283 (1) and consequently direct the first Respondentto complete the fresh assessment for the assessment year2015-2016 after granting reasonable/Sufficient opportunity ofhearing. For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Sriraman For Respondents : Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar Junior Standing Counsel The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of CertiorarifiedMandamus, to call for the records of the Writ Petitioner Companyon the file of the First Respondent to quash the impugned orderdated 30.03.2022 passed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act,1961, read with Sections 144 and 144B of the Act for theAssessment year 2015-16 in ITBA/AST/S/147/2021-22/1042139283 (1)and to direct the first Respondent to complete the freshassessment for the assessment year 2015-16 after grantingreasonable/Sufficient opportunity of hearing. 2. In respect of the Assessment Year 2015-16, since thepetitioner has not filed return under the provisions of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, [in short, 'the Act'] there was a noticeissued under Section 148 of the Act with an intention to assessthe petitioner under Section 147 of the Act. 3. Though such a notice was issued on 22.03.2021, thepetitioner has chosen to file a return only on 21.02.2022.Thereafter, a reply has been filed by the petitioner on28.02.2022. After considering the reply, there was a final showcause notice dated 24.03.2022 along with the draft assessmentorder, where, three days up to 27.03.2022 was given to thepetitioner to respond. Further, since there was no response, theRevenue proceeded to pass the assessment order dated 30.03.2022,which is under challenge in this writ petition. 4. Mr.A.S.Sriraman, learned counsel for the petitioner,would submit that, though the petitioner has alreadycommunicated to the Revenue about the change of e-mail ID,subsequently also, all these communications including the showcause notice has been sent only to the old e-mail ID. Therefore,immediately the petitioner could not receive it and retrieve itfrom the web portal. Therefore, within the three days time givenby the Revenue through the show cause notice dated 24.03.2022,the petitioner/assessee could not respond. Therefore, withoutgiving a chance of responding to the final show cause notice,the Revenue since has passed the impugned assessment order dated30.03.2022, it is vitiated, he contended. 5. I have heard Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, learnedJunior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue, who wouldpoint out that, the petitioner has taken nearly about a year torespond to Section 148 notice and even thereafter, when showcause notice was issued, he has not chosen to give reply. 5. I have heard Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar, learnedJunior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue, who wouldpoint out that, the petitioner has taken nearly about a year torespond to Section 148 notice and even thereafter, when showcause notice was issued, he has not chosen to give reply. 6. Ground now taken by the assessee that it was sent to theold e-mail ID is concerned, it is an e-mail ID of the Accountantof the petitioner/assessee, that was also given to the Revenue.Therefore, using that old E-mail ID only, these communicationshas been sent. Therefore, the learned Standing Counsel wouldsubmit that this case cannot be considered as a case, violatingthe principles of natural justice. 7. I have considered the said submissions made by thelearned counsel appearing on both sides, whether it has beensent to the old e-mail ID or otherwise, only three days time wasgiven between 24[th] March to 27[th] March 2022 to give reply for theshow cause notice along with the proposal i.e., the DraftAssessment order. It has been pointed out that, there is a vastdifference in addition, between the Draft Assessment order andthe final assessment order, which is impugned herein, where,more than 12 Crores have been added, though the same has beengiven up in the Draft assessment order. Hence, the learnedcounsel appearing for the petitioner urges that thepetitioner/assessee, if had been given a chance of repudiatingthe same as proposed through the Draft assessment order alongwith the show cause notice dated 24.03.2022, it would have beenin a position to tell as to how this addition could not havebeen possible. Therefore, in order to give one such chance tothe petitioner, this Court feels that the impugned order can beset aside and the matter can be remitted back to the respondentfor reconsideration. 8. In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined todispose of this writ petition with the following orders: (i) That the impugned order is set aside and the matter isremitted back to the respondent for reconsideration. Whilereconsidering the same, the impugned show cause notice dated24.03.2022 along with the Draft Assessment order shall betreated as a fresh notice with fresh Draft assessment order andaccordingly, it is open to the petitioner/assessee to respond tothe same by giving reply with documents, within a period of twoweeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order andthereafter, considering the said reply to be filed by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner, it is open to the Revenue to proceed and to passfinal assessment order. 9. With these directions, the writ petition stands disposedof. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitionsare closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar kak To1.The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi E-Ramp, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium,Delhi – 110 003.2.The Income Tax Officer,Non Corporate Ward 1 (2),Income Tax Department,No.121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. 3.The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1,Chennai,Income Tax Department,121, Mahatma Gandhi Road,Chennai – 600 034. +1cc to M/s.Hema Muralikrishnan, Advocate, S.R.No.28304+1cc to Mr.S,Sridhar, Advocate, S.R.No.28964 W.P.NO.10046 OF 2022 AD(CO)PBS/24/05/2022