Delhi High Court
Bengal And Assam Company Ltd. vs National Faceless Assessment ... on 4 July, 2023
$~18
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Decision delivered on: 04.07.2023
+ W.P.(C) 8788/2023
BENGAL AND ASSAM COMPANY LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr V.P. Gupta and Mr Anunav
Kumar, Advs.
versus
NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT
CENTRE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr Sanjay Kumar, Sr Standing
Counsel with Ms Easha Kadiyan and
Ms Hemlata Rawat, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):
1. Issue notice.
1.1 Mr Sanjay Kumar, learned senior standing counsel, accepts notice on
behalf of the respondents/revenue.
2. Given the directions that we propose to issue, Mr Kumar says that he
does not wish to file a counter-affidavit, and he will argue the matter based
on the record presently available with the court.
2.1 Therefore, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the
matter is taken up for hearing and final disposal at this stage itself.
3. This writ petition is directed against the assessment order dated
Signature Not Verified
Signing Date:06.07.2023
11:50:03
16.05.2023 passed by respondent no.1 under Section 147 read with Sections
144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "Act"].
4. The impugned assessment order concerns Assessment Year (AY)
2014-15.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the statutory notices,
that were required to be issued to the petitioner prior to the Assessing
Officer (AO) taking recourse to the best judgment assessment route, had not
been served on the e-mail address which was indicated by the petitioner,
both at the time of filing the initial return, and thereafter, on the return filed
pursuant to the notice issued under Section 148 of the Act.
6. The record shows that the petitioner was issued show cause notices
dated 15.03.2023 and 02.05.2023, at the following e-mail address:
"[email protected]"
[See Annexure P-12 & Annexure P-13 appended on pages 314 and 315 of
the case file].
7. To be noted, the returns filed by the petitioner bear the following e-
mail addresses:
"[email protected]; [email protected]"
[See Annexure P-15 and Annexure P-16 appended on pages 322 and 323 of
the case file].
8. Furthermore, the record also shows that in response to the notice
dated 13.01.2023 issued to the petitioner under Section 142(1) of the Act, a
detailed reply was filed on 07.02.2023.
9. It is the petitioner's contention that had this reply been taken into
account, the end result would have been different.
Signature Not Verified
Signing Date:06.07.2023
11:50:03
10. We may also note that the petitioner, in support of its plea that earlier
notices were issued at one of the e-mail addresses which were operable, has
sought to rely upon the documents marked as Annexure P-14 (colly.).
11. Having regard to the aforesaid, it appears that the AO, inadvertently,
issued statutory show cause notices to the petitioner at the e-mail address,
which was clearly not in use. The record reveals that the AO was aware of
the e-mail addresses that the petitioner was using.
12. Given this position, Mr Kumar cannot but accept, that the requirement
to serve statutory show cause notice, before taking recourse to best judgment
assessment, has not fructified. The first proviso to Section 144 mandates
issuance of a show cause notice before taking recourse to the best judgement
route.
12.1 Therefore, for the reasons given hereinabove, the impugned
assessment order is set aside.
12.2 Liberty is, however, given to the AO to pass a fresh assessment order.
In this behalf, the AO will take next steps in law, as per the provisions of the
Act, which would include the issuance of a formal show cause notice at the
correct e-mail address.
13. The writ petition is disposed of, in the aforesaid terms.
14. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the judgment.
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
GIRISH KATHPALIA, J
JULY 4, 2023
aj
Signature Not Verified
Signing Date:06.07.2023
11:50:03
