Case Law Details
Anuj Bakshi Vs ACIT (Calcutta High Court)
Introduction: The Calcutta High Court recently set aside an order passed under Sections 143(3) and 144B of the Income Tax Act of 1961, citing the violation of principles of Natural Justice. The petitioner, Anuj Bakshi, was denied the opportunity to participate in a hearing concerning his tax assessment. This article delves into the details and implications of this case, exploring how the court’s decision may set a precedent for future cases involving similar issues.
The Background: Anuj Bakshi challenged an impugned tax assessment order dated December 26, 2022, on the grounds that he was denied the opportunity to participate in the assessment hearing. Despite receiving a notice and a link for a video conference hearing, Bakshi was unable to access the conference due to technical issues. The court took into account the evidence presented by Bakshi, including screenshots showing a blank screen during the time of the hearing.
The Ruling: The Hon’ble Court decided to set aside the impugned order solely based on the violation of the principle of Natural Justice. It was observed that Bakshi was not at fault for his inability to participate in the hearing. The Court directed that the matter be sent back to the assessing officer for reconsideration, emphasizing that a new order should be passed after giving Bakshi or his authorized representative an opportunity to be heard.
Legal Implications: The decision has significant implications for the broader legal landscape. It reinforces the importance of the principle of Natural Justice in legal proceedings, especially those concerning individuals’ financial matters.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
