Madras High Court Quashes Assessment Order Passed Without Considering Assessee's Request Of Personal Hearing Through Video Conference

The Madras High Court has quashed the assessment order passed without considering the assessee's request for a personal hearing through video conference.

The bench of Justice S.Srimathy has observed that since it was a high-pitched assessment, the petitioner has sought a video conference hearing. Therefore, the non-granting of opportunity was clearly a violation of the principles of natural justice.

The petitioner/assessee is an agriculturist and grower of Gloriosa superba species. In its native language, it is called Karthigai Flower. The seeds of the plant are of high value in the international market. The seeds contained alkaloids and have been used as a traditional medicine in many cultures. It has been used in the treatment of gout, infertility, open wounds, snakebite, ulcers, arthritis, cholera, colic, kidney problems, typhus, itching, leprosy, bruises, sprains, hemorrhoids, cancer, impotence, nocturnal emission, smallpox, sexually transmitted diseases, and many types of internal parasites.

The respondent/department has issued show cause notice 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with a direction to submit the reply on or before 6.00 p.m. on September 22, 2022, which was intimated through SMS at about 08.15 p.m. on September 20, 2022. Thereby giving time only for 18 hours. Since the notice contains more than 30 pages, the petitioner requests that the concerned officer provide a 3-day adjournment for filing a detailed reply.

The request was submitted through online portal on 21.09.2022. But the respondent issued a final notice dated September 22, 2022, under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with a direction to produce documents and explanations on or before September 22, 2022. In response, the petitioner submitted the explanation dated September 22, 2022, before the cut-off time.

The petitioner, being an agriculturist residing in a village, received a belated SMS. Hence, in respect of online portal notices, he had submitted his explanations through his auditor. On the other hand, the respondent had taken a stand that the petitioner had not given a proper response to the notices, which is contrary to true facts. The petitioner sought a video conference hearing on September 22, 2022, with valid reasons, which request is available in the portal of the respondent department.

Without considering the request, the respondent passed the order dated September 26, 2022, by invoking Section 143(3) read with 144(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1971. The petitioner's request for a personal hearing through video conference was not at all considered, which is a vital opportunity. Denial of opportunity amounts to a violation of the principles of natural justice.

The department contended that the petitioner has an effective, alternative remedy against the impugned assessment order. The statutory appellate remedy lies before the appellate authority, namely the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

The court directed the respondents to grant a video conference hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner shall submit the certificates issued by the village administrative officer and also submit the translation copy. The assessment shall be completed within a period of eight weeks.

Counsel For Petitioner: R.Murali

Counsel For Respondent: N.Dilip Kumar

Case Title: C.Chellamuthu Versus The Principal Commissioner

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 405

Case No.: W.P.(MD).No.23385 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No.17465 of 2022

Click Here To Read The Order