Wp/2996/2019 Of B Sujith Kumar v. The Income Tax Officer
High Court
05 Mar 2020 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · aphc
Parties
Wp/2996/2019 Of B Sujith Kumar v. The Income Tax Officer
Date of order
05 Mar 2020
Assessment year(s)
2016-17
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Wp/2996/2019 Of B Sujith Kumar v. The Income Tax Officer, the High Court (2020) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the order of assessment, dated 22.12.2018 passed by the respondent.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.V.SESHA SAI
AND
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO
WRIT PETITION No.2996 of 2019
ORDER:(per the Hon’ble Sri Justice A.V. Sesha Sai)
Heard Sri Shaik Jeelani Basha, learned counsel for petitioner and Smt M.Kiranmayee, learned Standing Counsel for Income Tax.
2. Order of assessment bearing No.ITBA/AST/S/144/2018-19/1014512703(1), dated 22.12.2018 for the assessment year 2016-17 passed by the respondent herein, is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.
3. The only issue that has been canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the present Writ Petition is that the assessing authority issued the order under challenge in contravention of the principles of natural justice and without considering the objections submitted by the petitioner through online, dated 11.10.2018.
4. The assessing authority issued a notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 01.10.2018. According to the petitioner, he submitted his objections to the said notice on 11.10.2018. In the impugned order, the assessing authority observed that the assessee did not respond to the notice, dated 01.10.2018, but peculiarly in the counter affidavit filed by the
assessing authority, reference is made to the receipt of the said objections.
5. It is a settled and well established principle of law that any action which has civil consequences must necessarily be preceded by notice and opportunity of being heard to the persons likely affected by such action. In the considered opinion of this Court, in the instant case, the assessing authority adhered to the said principle in breach and the said action is a patent violation of principles of natural justice. On this ground alone, this Writ Petition is liable to be allowed.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition is allowed, setting aside the order of assessment, dated 22.12.2018 passed by the respondent. The matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration for passing appropriate order, strictly in accordance with law, after considering the objections of the petitioner and by giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.
There shall be no order as to costs of the Writ Petition.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any in the Writ Petition, shall stand closed.
__________________
A.V.SESHA SAI, J
_________________________
R.RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
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.