Case Law Details
Mangal Chand Vs Additional/ Joint/ Deputy/ ACIT/ ITO (Madras High Court)
In a recent case before the Madras High Court, a significant issue related to the violation of natural justice has come to the forefront. The case of Mangal Chand vs. ACIT (Additional Commissioner of Income Tax) highlights the importance of considering adjournment requests before making assessment orders.
Background of the Case: The petitioner, in this case, is an individual assessee who owns M/s. Rakhee Aluminium Hardware Centre, engaged in the trading of aluminum materials. The petitioner had filed income tax returns for the assessment year 2018-19, and his case was selected for scrutiny under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1962.
Transition to Faceless Assessment: During the assessment process, the petitioner received a notice indicating that the scrutiny assessment for the relevant year would be conducted under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 (formerly known as the e-Assessment Scheme, 2019).
Adjournment Requests: Throughout the assessment process, the petitioner faced several challenges, including health issues related to COVID-19. The petitioner sought adjournments to provide the necessary details and documents, citing valid reasons. However, these requests were met with limited extensions and strict timelines.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
