Direct Tax Services
Select Your Location
The Delhi High Court, in the case of Bharat Aluminium Company Limited v Union of India and Ors, ruled that an assessee must be given a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing if the assessee asks for the same under the income tax act. The hon’ble court further ruled that the provision of faceless assessment scheme doesn’t imply that no personal hearing can be granted and that a taxpayer has a vested right to personal hearing.
Table of Contents
This scheme was introduced by the Central government in 2020 by insertion of Section 144B through the Taxation & Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020.
It was introduced in order to promote an efficient and effective tax administration, minimizing physical interface, increasing accountability and introduction of a team-based assessment.
The Bench of Justices Manmohan and Navin Chawla were dealing with a petition filed by Bharat Aluminium Company Limited that challenged the final assessment order and notice by the Income Tax Department under Section 143(3) of Income Tax Act.
The petitioner argued that the order was passed without following the principles of natural justice and the order was in violation of the scheme under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act as even after the ‘nil’ variation proposed in the show cause notice, addition was made to the assessed income.
It was alleged that such additions to the assessed income was made on a ‘false premise’ that the petitioner didn’t furnish relevant details in response to a statutory notice issued to them even though it was the own portal of the respondent that was having technical issues owing to which the petitioner couldn’t upload the file.
Further, the petitioner also argued that under Section 144B(1) (xvi) of the Income Tax Act, an opportunity should be given to the assessee if there is any variation of the assessment that is proposed and which is prejudicial to his interest.
The Ld. Counsel for petitioner stated that the petitioner had not been granted any opportunity of personal hearing, despite a specific request that was made under Section 144B(7) of the Act by the petitioner.
The Ld. Counsel further stated that the Court in the case of Sanjay Aggarwal vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre and Umkal Healthcare (P.) Ltd. vs. NFAC has held that it was incumbent upon the Department to accord a personal hearing to the assessee where a request of such nature was made under Section 144B (7) and in case of failure to do so would amount to violation of principles of natural justice.
To sum up the entire argument of the respondent, according to him, the personal hearing is discretionary and emphasised that under faceless assessment under Section 144B of the Act, the assessee doesn’t have any vested right to personal hearing and it could be granted depending on the individual facts of each case & fulfilling of the conditions laid down in SOP (November 23, 2020).
Delhi High Courts’ Reasoning and Ruling
The Hon’ble Delhi HC stated that after hearing learned counsel for the parties, it is unable to comprehend how despite ‘Nil’ or ‘Null’ variation proposed in the show cause notice, additions were made to the assessed income in the draft Assessment Order & the final Assessment Order.
Moreover, the Court also observed that no opportunity of personal hearing was given despite a specific request being made by the petitioner. Further, the Court remarked that a faceless assessment scheme does not mean no personal hearing, and the court failed to understand how grant of personal hearing would either frustrate the concept or defeat the purpose of Faceless Assessment Scheme.
The court dismissed the respondents’ argument that personal hearing, according to its November 2020 circular, shall be allowed only in cases where facts are disputed. The court stated that such argument is untenable as cases involving issues of law would also require a personal hearing.
However, at last, in view of the revenue department’s concern that the scheme aims for no one-to-one interface, the hon’ble court suggested the identity of the assessing officer may be hidden or protected while extending personal hearing by either creating a blank screen or by decreasing pixel, density or resolution.
Accordingly, the Delhi HC set aside the impugned order and the notice and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer (AO).
The court’s ruling that an assessee has a vested right to personal hearing and it has to be given, if an assessee asks for it and the fact that right of personal hearing can’t depend upon the facts of each case, comes as a significant relief for assessees who feel aggrieved by the revenue departments action where no personal hearing was granted. The court also noted that, if the argument of the respondent/Revenue is accepted, then it, while hearing an appeal under Section 260A (which only involves a substantial question of law) will not be obliged in law to provide a personal hearing to the counsel for the Revenue.
Read our Article: Income Tax Refunds for AY 2021-22: 1.5 Crore Refunds Issued
Ashish M. Shaji has done his graduation in law (BA. LLB) from CCS University. He has keen interests in doing extensive research and writing on legal subjects especially on corporate law. He is a creative thinker and has a great interest in exploring legal subjects.
The Reserve Bank of India, in its press release dated June 8, 2023, issued Statement on Develop...
RBI released a developmental and regulatory policy statement on June 8, 2023. The objective of...
Financial Institutions called Asset Reconstruction Companies ("ARCs") reconstruct and securitis...
Any person booked for an offence under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPc) / the Code would be r...
The Reserve Bank of India regulates Non-Banking Financial Companies in India, and they are subj...
The Reserve Bank of India regulates Non-banking Financial Companies in accordance with the RBI...
Incorporation of a Limited Liability Company (LLC) is an attractive choice for small business o...
The Reserve Bank of India (the Bank) issued Non-Banking Financial Companies Acceptance of Publi...
A few years ago, investing in traditional investment categories like shares, bonds, real estate...
Compared to other organisations, the corporate governance of Non-Banking Financial Companies is...
Are you human?: 9 + 2 =
Easy Payment Options Available No Spam. No Sharing. 100% Confidentiality
A home loan can help an individual in saving tax as per the provisions provided under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Aft...
22 Mar, 2020
In the age of globalization, the exchange of information has become an important facet of the enforcement of tax la...
22 Mar, 2023
Red Herring Top 100 Asia enlists outstanding entrepreneurs and promising companies. It selects the award winners from approximately 2000 privately financed companies each year in the Asia. Since 1996, Red Herring has kept tabs on these up-and-comers. Red Herring editors were among the first to recognize that companies such as Google, Facebook, Kakao, Alibaba, Twitter, Rakuten, Salesforce.com, Xiaomi and YouTube would change the way we live and work.
Researchers have found out that organization using new technologies in their accounting and tax have better productivity as compared to those using the traditional methods. Complying with the recent technological trends in the accounting industry, Enterslice was formed to focus on the emerging start up companies and bring innovation in their traditional Chartered Accountants & Legal profession services, disrupt traditional Chartered Accountants practice mechanism & Lawyers.
Stay updated with all the latest legal updates. Just enter your email address and subscribe for free!
Chat on Whatsapp
Hey I'm Suman. Let's Talk!