Case Law Details
Shapoorji Pallonji Solar Holdings Private Limited Vs ITO (Madras High Court)
Writ Petition- Remedy Under Article 226 of Constitution of The India Constitutes An Extraordinary Remedy
Assessee challenged the assessment order mainly on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice urging the point that the order had travelled beyond the scope of show-cause notice. While the order rejected the assesse’s entitlement to carry-forward long term capital loss though such a proposal was not form part of pre-assessment SCN.
The Court, though observed that normally it is inclined to treat violation of principles of natural justice, particularly of the nature as set out by the assessee in this petition , seriously, & that there have been several instances where the Court has intervened in the order of assessment in question, directing de novo assessment, in line with the principles of natural justice, in the present case, the petitioner has challenged the assessment order by way of statutory appeal, inter alia, raising the ground raised in the writ petition.
Assessee relied upon the decisions of – Tin Box Company v CIT [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC), K.S.Shivji & Co., v JCIT 1965 SCC Online Mad 87, Irecti Services Private Limited v ACIT – Bombay High Court, Kantilal Somehand Shah and Another v Collector of Customs & C.Ex., 1982 (10) E.L.T. 902(Cal.) and pointed out that in the aforaesaid cases, the respective petitioners had availed appellate remedy despite which the Courts were inclined to intervene for violation of principles of natural justice.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
