Wp/2931/2021 Of Amit Kantilal Sheth v. The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax - 17, Mumbai And 4 Ors

GAURIAMITGAEKWAD Digitallysigned byGAURI AMITGAEKWADDate:2021.12.1410:42:50+0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2931 OF 2021 Amit Kantilal Sheth ….Petitioner V/s. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-17, Mumbai and Ors. ….Respondents ---- Mr. Vijay Patel a/w. Ms. Krishma Shah for petitioner.Mr. Suresh Kumar for respondents. ---- CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ. DATED : 13[th] DECEMBER 2021 P.C. : 1After the petition was heard for some time, we would agreewith the counsel for petitioner that the time granted to comply with thenotice under Section 153(A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the said Act) forAssessment Year 2019-2020 was too short and it was most unreasonable on the part of respondents not to have given a reasonable time to petitioner torespond. We also find that petitioner was served a notice dated22[nd] September 2021 under Section 142(1) of the said Act for AssessmentYear 2020-2021 granting only one day time to respond and then, theimpugned order came to be passed. Therefore, the order dated 29[th] September 2021, which is 2 impugned in this petition, is quashed and set aside. 3 3Petitioner shall file the returns, if legally required, within oneweek, file submissions in support of its case within a week thereafter andwithin four weeks from that date, respondent shall, after giving a personalhearing to petitioner, pass the assessment order for Assessment Year2019-2020 and 2020-2021. 4Mr. Patel states that petitioner's application under Section132(B) of the said Act has been pending since October 2019. 5The said application shall also be heard and decided by theJurisdictional Authority and petitioner shall be given a personal hearingbefore deciding, within three weeks from the date of this order beinguploaded. 6Petition disposed. (AMIT B. BORKAR, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)