Notice of Reassessment Not received to Assessee Either through Email or Speed Post: Calcutta HC Directs PCIT to Reconsider Assessment [Read Order]

In a recent case, the Calcutta High Court directed the principal commissioner of Income Tax ( PCIT ) to reconsider assessment as the notice of reassessment was not received to assessee either through email or speed post. Gopal Das, the petitioner submitted that there was a delay of 48 days in filing the appeal. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition and sufficient cause has been shown for not being able to prefer the appeal within the period of limitation. Get a Copy of Income Tax Rules, Click here The writ petition was filed challenging an order passed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Asansol ( PCIT ) dated 23rd March, 2021 rejecting the application filed by the appellant under Section 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). It was well-settled principle of law that the Court cannot examine the merits of the matter and the correctness of the order can be tested only with regard to the decision making process. There are certain set parameters, which would empower the Court to interfere in such orders in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for which the petitioner has to establish certain grounds, one of which is that there is a violation of principles of natural justice. The appellant contended that though an elaborate application was filed under Section 264 of the Act, the PCIT by the order dated 23rd March, 2021 has merely accepted the remand report submitted by the Assessing Officer dated 10th March, 2021 and rejected the petition. Get a Copy of Income Tax Rules, Click here Though a copy of the remand report was furnished to the appellant along with a show-cause notice, the appellant did not avail the opportunity by submitting his objections or submitting clarifications to the issues pointed out by the assessing officer in the remand report. The PCIT while considering the application under Section 264 of the Act should first take note of the submissions made in the application, consider the remand report and then take a decision on merits and in accordance with law. The division bench of Chief Justice T S Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya found that the PCIT has not dealt with the merits of the matter but has rejected the petition taking note of the conduct of the appellant in the assessment proceedings, which were completed under Section 144 of the Act by order dated 4th December, 2019. In the application filed under Section 264 of the Act, the appellant pleads that he has not received any notice either through e-mail or through speed post and he was unaware that assessment proceedings were under progress and therefore, the assessee cannot be termed to have wilfully ignored the notices. The assessee contended that he had a bank credit limit in the form of cash credit for his trading activities in UCO Bank and other factual details have also been set out. It was pointed out that the assessment under Section 144 is a high pitched assessment and the said amount is aggregated cash deposited during the financial year 2016-17 in the bank account maintained by the assessee. The details of the bank accounts were furnished by the assessee and the assessee takes a specific stand that no cash deposits were made in the savings account. There are other grounds, which have been raised by the assessee in the application filed under Section 264 of the Act. Since the assessee has lost his right of appeal and there is an allegation that notices issued by the Assessing Officer were not received by the assessee either by e-mail or by speed post, without standing on technicalities, the court viewed that one more opportunity can be granted to the assessee to go before the PCIT. The PCIT directed to reconsider the matter after taking into consideration the submissions of the appellant, the remand report and the response to the show-cause notice dated 18th March, 2021. The authorized representative of the appellant shall be afforded an opportunity of personal hearing before a decision is taken Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates