Pre-dating demand notice even before the assessment order was passed showed the assessee was denied any opportunity of hearing in violation of natural justice – ITAT
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2799 (2019) (02) ITAT
In the instant case, the assessee had filed the appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in confirming the addition made for unexplained loans.
The assessee raised a legal ground that the notice of demand was pre-dated even before the assessment order was passed.
It was pointed out that the notice of demand issued by the Assessing Officer borne the date as 28.12.2012 whereas the assessment order was dated 31.12 .2012.
It was also submitted that the AO had sent the last notice dated 26.12.2012 fixing the date of hearing on 31.12.2012 suggesting that even before the date of hearing itself, the demand notice was prepared to give effect to the demand notice, the impugned order of assessment was passed without allowing any opportunity of hearing.
Thus, it was the case of the assessee that the impugned order was being passed in violation to the principles of natural justice and therefore the same was bad in law.
The Tribunal observed that the demand notice itself was issued on 28.12.2012, the hearing fixed on 31.12 .2012 became farce.
The Tribunal expressed agreement with the submission that proper opportunity of hearing was not allowed to the assessee and the impugned order was passed in violation o f principles of natural justice.
Accordingly, the ITAT set aside the assessment order and allowed appeal of the assessee.
Assessing Officer had taken a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat/text message was 25 lakh - ITAT…
Shareholders are only owners of the shares of the company therefore, income from properties earned by the company cannot be…
When approval for reassessment was granted by unauthorised authority, such jurisdictional error cannot be shielded by the law of limitation…
ITAT on presumption of bogus purchases ought to have remanded case to AO to reconsider the whole matter instead of…
Where proceedings u/s 153C are barred by limitation, AO can not reopen the case invoking section 148 and 148A of…
Corporate guarantees executed by the corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC and banks to be recognized as financial creditors…