Reply was not submitted as e-filing portal was closed, Assessment order set aside

Reply was not submitted as e-filing portal was closed, Assessment order set aside as time given for submitting reply was extremely short.

In a recent judgment, Hon’ble High Court of Himanchal Pradesh has set aside the income tax assessment order where time granted for submitting reply to the petitioner was extremely short and reply was not submitted as e-filing portal was closed

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 4019 (2024) (05) HC

The petitioner had challenged the assessement order passed under Sections 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 

The Petitioner was a private limited company and engaged in the manufacturing of pharmaceuticals etc. The assessee filed its return of income u/s 139(1). Subsequently a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued, informing the petitioner that his case was selected for scrutiny under the CASSS.

Thereafter, notices under Sections 142(1) of the Act were issued to the petitioner. Detailed reply was furnished by the petitioner to the same. Again, notices were issued under Section 142(1) of the Act, which were compiled by the petitioner.

Again, a show-cause notice was sent at 10:59 p.m, to the e-mail of the petitioner and its Chartered Accountant, seeking a reply by 15.45 p.m. on within fourth day which happened to be Sunday.

The Petitioner submitted that on Sunday the Assessing Officer closed the e-filing portal and restricted the petitioner to file the response. It was submitted that on the same day, at 11:39 p.m. the Petitioner submitted its response to the show-cause notice via email to the National Faceless Assessment Centre stating specifically that the Income Tax portal was closed.

However, on Wednesday, the Assessing Officer (AO) without considering the reply/submission tendered by the petitioner, passed an order under Sections 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Act.

The petitioner contended that time granted for submitting reply to the show-cause notice of a period less than four days was arbitrary, and sufficient time ought to have been granted by AO to enable the petitioner to submit its reply to the show-cause notice. It was pointed out that the petitioner was ready with the reply and had filed the same on the same day at 11:39 p.m. through the National Faceless Assessment Centre, but in view of the fact the Assessing Officer had closed the e-filing portal by then on the ground that the petitioner had not submitted the reply by 15:45 p.m., the same could not be uploaded.

The Hon’ble High Court opined that the time granted for submitting reply to the petitioner was extremely short, and when there was no undue delay on the part of the petitioner in submitting the reply and it had submitted the reply on the date fixed on Sunday though sometime after 15:45 p.m. the same ought not to have been ignored by the AO and the impugned order could not have been passed by him.

Accordingly, the impugned assessment order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to AO to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner and then pass a reasoned order in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• Related party transaction u/s 40A(2) shall be treated as bona fide, unless evading tax
• ‘Transfer of property’ not include ‘acquiring’ of property or ‘purchasing’ of property – ITAT
• AO was not justified in questioning cash withdrawals from bank account – ITAT
• Return/Balance sheet filed within limitation extended by SC to be considered within time
• Satisfaction Note u/s 153C – term immediate cannot be extended to unreasonable delay