(M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ.)
Additional Joint Deputy Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Officer and Others ____________________________________ Appellant(s);
v.
Multiplier Brand Solutions Pvt. Ltd. __________________ Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 1831 of 2023 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 4607/2023), decided on March 21, 2023
The Order of the court was delivered by
Order
1. Leave granted.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 25.10.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No. 1378/2021, by which the Division Bench of the High Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has set aside the Assessment Order declaring it as non est as the mandatory requirement under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”), namely, the show cause notice with a draft Assessment Order was not issued and served upon the assessee, the Revenue has preferred the present Appeal.
3. Shri Balbir Singh, learned ASG, appearing for the Revenue has submitted that, as such, the High Court ought not to have entertained the writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order of assessment. It is submitted that even otherwise if the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that the assessment proceedings were in breach of principles of natural justice inasmuch as the show cause notice with draft Assessment Order was not served in that case the matter ought to have remanded to the Assessing Officer and with a liberty in favour of the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order in accordance with law and after following due procedure as required under Section 144B of the Act.
4. Having heard Shri Balbir Singh, learned ASG, appearing of the Revenue and Shri Ambhoj Kumar Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee and having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court and considering the fact that the Assessment Order was passed without issuing a show cause notice with a draft Assessment Order as was mandatorily required under Section 144B of the Act, as such, it cannot be said that the High Court has committed any error. However, at the same time, considering the fact that the Faceless Assessment Scheme has been introduced recently and therefore, the Revenue ought to have been given some leverage to correct themselves and take the corrective measures and therefore the High Court ought to have remanded the matter to the Assessment Officer to pass a fresh order in accordance with law, after following the due procedure as required under the law, namely, more particularly, under Section 144B of the Act.
5. In view of the above for the reasons stated above, we modify the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court and remand the matter to the Assessment Officer to pass a fresh Assessment Order, after following due procedure in accordance with law under Section 144B of the Act.
6. All the contentions/defences which are available to the assessee on merits are kept open to be considered by the Assessing Officer in accordance with law and on its own merits.
7. With this, the present Appeal stands disposed of.
———
