Wtax/83/2023 Of Kunal Agarwal v. Deputy Commissioner/ Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And Another
High Court
14 Feb 2023 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · cisdb_16012018
Parties
Wtax/83/2023 Of Kunal Agarwal v. Deputy Commissioner/ Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And Another
Date of order
14 Feb 2023
Assessment year(s)
2021-22
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In Wtax/83/2023 Of Kunal Agarwal v. Deputy Commissioner/ Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And Another, the High Court (2023) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: Accordingly, the present petition is allowed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 83 of 2023
Petitioner :- Kunal Agarwal
Respondent :- Deputy Commissioner/ Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax And Another
Counsel for Petitioner :- Suyash Agarwal
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Gaurav Mahajan,Sudarshan Singh
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Acting Chief JusticeHon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Suyash Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner;Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the revenue and SriSudarshan Singh, learned counsel for the Union of India.
2. Challenge has been raised to the assessment order dated29.12.2022 passed by the Deputy Commissioner/AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Bareilly in thecase of the petitioner under Section 143(3) of the Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for A.Y. 2021-22.
3. Upon brief hearing, it is undisputed between the parties thatthe earlier order has been passed not under the new procedurei.e. faceless mechanism, rather, it has been passed under the oldprocedure wherein the assessee was entitled to an opportunityof hearing by the assessing authority, on the objections raised.Undisputedly, that opportunity has remained from beingprovided inasmuch as upon issuance of notice under Section142(1) and 142(2) of the Act, no date for hearing was fixed.
4. Though Sri Gaurav Mahajan, learned counsel for the revenuewould contest the matter on merits, he fairly states, opportunityof hearing has remained from being provided.
5. No useful purpose would be served in keeping the presentpetition pending or calling for a counter affidavit, at this stageinasmuch as undisputedly, the assessment order suffers fromviolation of fundamental principle of natural justice.
6. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The impugned
assessment order dated 29.12.2022 is set aside and the matter isremitted to the respondent no.1/Deputy Commissioner/AssistantCommissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-I, Bareilly to issuea fresh notice fixing a date for hearing in the proceedings andthereafter pass a reasoned and speaking order. Such exercisemay be completed, as expeditiously as possible, preferablywithin a period of two months from the date of production of acertified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 14.2.2023Abhilash
.
(S. D. Singh, J) (Pritinker Diwaker, ACJ)
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.