Case Law Details
Nirjay Securities P. Ltd. Vs ITO (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court recently delivered a judgment in the case of Nirjay Securities P. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (ITO), shedding light on a significant legal matter involving the Income Tax Act of 1961. This article delves into the details of the case, analyzing the petitioner’s claims, the court’s response, and the implications for taxpayers.
1. Allegations of Delay: The petitioner alleged that they responded to a notice under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act on 9th and 16th March 2021. Surprisingly, the 2nd respondent took no action for six months, until 3rd September 2021, leaving the petitioner in a state of uncertainty.
2. Rushed Assessment Order: The petitioner received a draft assessment order on 23rd September 2021, providing only three working days to respond. The petitioner requested a short adjournment and personal hearing through video conferencing, which was denied. The court condemned the 2nd respondent’s actions and expressed disappointment at the lack of diligence in handling the case. It urged the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to sensitize its officers to prevent such treatment of assessees.
3. Setting Aside the Assessment Order: In response to the petitioner’s grievances, the Bombay High Court decided to quash and set aside the assessment order dated 29th September 2021. The matter was remanded to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) with clear instructions to follow the directions given by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and grant a personal hearing to the petitioner. Notice of the hearing should be communicated at least five working days in advance.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
