Mere creation of video conferencing (VC) meeting ID/Link does not absolve responsibility of offering personal hearing – High Court
In a recent judgment, Calcutta High Court has held that mere creation of video conferencing (VC) meeting ID/Link, does not absolve the Faceless Assessment Unit from discharging its responsibility of offering personal hearing. The meeting ID/Link is required to be disclosed/shared, for the petitioner to log in to the said ID/Link, for ensuring compliance of the statutory provision of personal hearing as provided for in Section 144B(6)(viii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 4142 (2024) (07) HC
In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order issued under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) read with Section 144B of the said Act and the consequential demand notice issued under Section 156 of the Act.
The short point involved in the writ petition was with regard the question whether the petitioner had been afforded the opportunity of personal hearing through video conferencing or video telephony, despite making a request, in terms of Section 144B(6)(viii) of the Act.
The case of the Petitioner was that despite making a request prior to passing of the assessment order for personal hearing, and despite the Revenue approving such request, the petitioner could not attend the personal hearing since the communication as appearing on the e-filing portal did not provide for any video conferencing link.
On the other hand, the Revenue submitted that the petitioner was duly notified of the video conferencing link. Since the petitioner did not log in, no personal hearing could be held. Such fact was also recorded in the impugned order.
The petitioner also placed before the Court a print out of the screen shot from the portal, which is accessible from the petitioner’s account. Such print out did not demonstrate that the aforesaid notice was not visible on the online portal.
The Revenue submitted that by reasons of technical glitch the aforesaid communication may not appear to the petitioner on the portal. The Hon’ble High Court was told that steps had been taken by the faceless assessment unit for having the same uploaded on the portal, if the petitioner is unable to view the same the faceless assessment unit cannot be made responsible therefor.
The Hon’ble High Court observed that in terms of Section 144B(6)(viii) of the Act the Faceless Assessment Unit is duty bound to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the assessee concerned.
The Hon’ble High Court opined that admittedly the petitioner had applied for an opportunity of personal hearing. The petitioner’s request was also approved by the Faceless Assessment Unit. The screen shot, however, does not disclose that any video conferencing link had been shared, for the petitioner to log in and join the link, the same only records that the ‘V.C. Link’ and password will be displayed two hours prior to schedule time for ‘V.C’. The petitioner claim was that it did not receive the V.C. Link. Although, the petitioner had made a contemporaneous complaint, prior to such complaint being resolved, the assessment order had been passed.
The Hon’ble High Court further observed that the Revenue on the strength of the copy of notice claimed that video conferencing link was shared with the petitioner. The said document, however, was not visible on the petitioner’s view of the portal. Also, no automated SMS alerts/email alerts were also trigged.
The Hon’ble High Court opined that mere creation of video conferencing meeting ID/Link, does not absolve the Faceless Assessment Unit from discharging its responsibility of offering personal hearing. The meeting ID/Link is required to be disclosed/shared, for the petitioner to log in to the said ID/Link, for ensuring compliance of the statutory provision of personal hearing as provided for in Section 44B(6)(viii) of the said Act. The Faceless Assessment Unit cannot claim to absolve of its responsibility by mere creation of a meeting ID/Link, without having the same shared to the petitioner. The finding by the Faceless Assessment Unit in the impugned order that the petitioner chose not to attend the Video Conference thus, appeared to be perverse and was based on no evidence.
The Hon’ble High Court held that for want of providing opportunity of personal hearing, the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same was accordingly set aside.
Accordingly, the matter was remanded back to the Faceless Assessment Unit for affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing by sharing a video conferencing link and decide the matter afresh from the stage of affording personal hearing.
Download Full Judgment Click Here >>
- All banks to migrate their existing domains to ‘.bank.in’ latest by 31.10.2025
- ITR filed after death can not be ignored for compensation under Motor Vehicles Act
- CBIC tweaks Guidelines in view of “Certificate of Origin” replaced by “Proof of Origin”
- Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra elected Chairman of the Bar Council of India
- There is a need to impose time limit on oral submissions in Arbitration cases – SC
