Case Law Details
Chakkunnath Gopi Vs ITO (Kerala High Court)
The case of Chakkunnath Gopi Vs Income Tax Officer (ITO) brought before the Kerala High Court revolves around the denial of a virtual hearing due to a procedural formality. This article delves into the details of the case, the judgment delivered by the court, and its implications.
The petitioner, Chakkunnath Gopi, contested an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, through an appeal. Opting for a virtual hearing, the petitioner followed due procedure, providing necessary details including the authorized representative’s credentials. However, despite compliance, the petitioner’s request for virtual hearing was denied on the grounds of non-compliance with the prescribed form.
The crux of the matter lies in the denial of virtual hearing based solely on procedural grounds. The court’s ruling emphasized that while procedures are essential, they should not impede the substantive rights of individuals, especially when it comes to fundamental rights such as the right to be heard. Denying a virtual hearing based on procedural formality without considering the petitioner’s eligibility for substantive right goes against principles of natural justice.
The judgment of the Kerala High Court sets a precedent by highlighting the importance of ensuring procedural fairness while adjudicating matters under the Income Tax Act. It underscores the need for authorities to exercise discretion judiciously, ensuring that procedural requirements do not overshadow the substantive rights of individuals.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
