Case Law Details
N. Kannammal Vs Assessment Unit (Madras High Court)
Introduction: The Madras High Court recently heard a writ petition filed by N. Kannammal challenging the assessment order passed by the Assessment Unit under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 07.12.2022. The petitioner contended that the order was unjust as it failed to consider her submitted reply and did not afford her an opportunity for a personal hearing.
Background: N. Kannammal had filed her income tax return for the Assessment Year 2021-22. Subsequently, her case was selected for scrutiny, and a show cause notice dated 24.11.2022 was issued, asking her to explain why the assessment should not be completed as per the Draft Assessment Order. The petitioner filed a timely reply on 01.12.2022, well within the specified deadline of 01.12.2022 at 13:19 hours. However, the impugned order dated 07.12.2022 stated that no such reply had been received, raising concerns about due process.
Petitioner’s Arguments: Mr. N.V. Narayanan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that the respondent failed to consider the petitioner’s reply and issued the order without granting a personal hearing. He asserted that the impugned order was, therefore, unjust and should be set aside.
Respondent’s Response: The learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent explained that, before the reply was reflected in the Income Tax Business Application-Permanent Accountant Number (ITBA-PAN), the proposal had already been submitted to the department. The delay in reflection was attributed to the normal processing time, and the reply was considered only after the proposal was sent for approval and the final assessment order was passed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
