Case Law Details
Chennai Port Authority Vs DCIT (Madras High Court)
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner’s request for personal hearing through video conferencing was not considered and the same was mechanically rejected and the impugned orders were passed, which is clear violation of principles of natural justice. In similar circumstances, this Court allowed similar request in W.P.No.21831 of 2021 on 10.02.2023. Accordingly, the learned counsel prayed for allowing these writ petitions.
The learned Senior Standing Counsel (Income Tax) appearing for the respondents submitted that there is statute provided for personal hearing through video conferencing or physically, however, petitioner submitted reply for the show cause notices and after considering the petitioner’s reply only impugned orders were passed. Further, the petitioner claim that it has to produce voluminous documents before the Authority and hence, personal hearing through video conferencing was not provided to the petitioner. However, the Assessing Officer is sitting at Chennai on 03.05.2023 at Non – Corporate Circle – 11 (1), BSNL Building Tower, Greams Road, Chennai – 600 006 and without prejudice to the rights of the respondents, the petitioner will be given opportunity.
In view of the fair submission made by the learned Senior Standing Counsel (Income Tax) appearing for the respondents, the impugned orders passed by the second respondent dated 14.03.2023 are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
