The Madras High Court nullifies an assessment order that overlooked the assessee’s plea for a personal hearing via video conference.
Case Title: C. Chellamuthu Versus The Principal Commissioner
Case No.: W.P.(MD). No.23385 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No.17465 of 2022
Decided on: 12th December, 2023
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S. SRIMATHY
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, identified as an agriculturist and cultivator of Gloriosa superba, also referred to as the Karthigai Flower, emphasized the plant’s seeds’ noteworthy international significance. The seeds of the plant contain alkaloids with ancient therapeutic purposes. Under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the respondent, represented by the income tax department, was served with a show cause notice. However, the petitioner asked for a three-day adjournment using the online site, citing the lengthy notice and the limited 18-hour response period. Nevertheless, a final notification pursuant to Section 142(1) was sent out, requiring the submission of documents by the same deadline. Owing to a delayed SMS receipt, the village resident, petitioner provided reasons via an auditor.
On September 26, 2022, the petitioner requested a video conference hearing, which the respondent denied, citing insufficient responses. The petitioner contends that this request is an infringement on their right to natural justice. The petitioner claims that by denying their request for a video conference hearing on September 22, 2022, the court is violating natural justice principles by denying them a vital chance to make their case. Nonetheless, the respondent department contends that the petitioner has a further remedy available to them via the statutory appeal procedure before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). In contesting the legality of the assessment order, the petitioner highlights the significance of due process and equitable consideration of their submissions, particularly in the context of their status as an agriculturist with reliance on an alternative remedy.
Legal Provisions
The applicable legal guidelines in this case are outlined in the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Issues
Can the denial of a video conference hearing in assessment proceedings be considered a violation of natural justice?
Courts analysis and decision
The high stakes of the evaluation were mentioned by the court in the petitioner’s special request for a video conference session. According to the court, there was a blatant disregard for natural justice principles when this opportunity was denied. Thus, the petitioner was granted the desired video conference hearing, and the court ordered the respondents to comply. Furthermore, the petitioner was directed by the court to provide translations of the village administrative officer’s certifications from them.
Within the allotted eight weeks, the court ordered that the assessment be finished. The court ordered the respondents to provide the petitioner a video conference hearing. The petitioner has to submit both the translated copy and the certificates that the village administrative officer has issued. After receiving a copy of this order, the aforementioned examination must be finished within eight weeks.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Rupika Goundla