Karnataka HC sets aside Income Tax Assessment Order Relying on Stock Exchange and Bank Data Without Providing Hearing Opportunity [Read Order]
Considering the assessment order passed without providing hearing opportunity, Karnataka High Court set aside the order
![Karnataka HC sets aside Income Tax Assessment Order Relying on Stock Exchange and Bank Data Without Providing Hearing Opportunity [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Income-Tax-Income-Tax-Assessment-Stock-Exchange-and-Bank-Data-TAXSCAN.jpeg "Karnataka HC sets aside Income Tax Assessment Order Relying on Stock Exchange and Bank Data Without Providing Hearing Opportunity [Read Order]")
In a recent hearing, the Karnataka High Court set aside an assessment order passed on relying on stock exchange and band information without providing hearing opportunity for the assessee. Shameer Razaik, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the revenue under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961...
In a recent hearing, the Karnataka High Court set aside an assessment order passed on relying on stock exchange and band information without providing hearing opportunity for the assessee.
Shameer Razaik, the petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders passed by the revenue under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 20.11.2023 for assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16.
Know When to Say No to Cash Transactions, Click here.
The petitioner submitted that the respondents had allegedly procured information from the Stock Exchange and Banks that was not furnished to the petitioner for his explanation, violating the principles of natural justice.
The petitioner further submitted that these orders were prejudicial to his interests. The petitioner argued that he had filed additional written submissions on 14.11.2023 for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16, which were not fully considered in the impugned order dated 20.11.2023.
Know When to Say No to Cash Transactions, Click here.
The petitioner argued that his declared income under the 2016 scheme should have been taken into account, and its non-consideration further invalidated the orders.
On the contrary, the respondents argued that there was no merit in the petitioner's claims and requested the court to dismiss the petition.
Justice S.R. Krishna Kumar heard both sides arguments. The court observed that the additional submissions made by the petitioner on 14.11.2023 had not been considered in full and should be re-examined.
Know When to Say No to Cash Transactions, Click here.
The court found that the information procured from the Stock Exchange and Banks had not been shared with the petitioner, which violated the natural justice principles. The court agreed with the petitioner that the Income Declaration Scheme should have been considered, and its omission vitiated the impugned orders.
Therefore, the court set aside the order and remanded the case for fresh adjudication. The petitioner’s petition was allowed
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
