PICHILA JAYACHANDRA REDDY Vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the assessment order for the year 2012-13 dtd. 31/3/2022 bearing No.ITBA/AST/F/17/2021-22/1042398683(1) vide Annexure-A to the writ petition the assessee has filed the instant writ petition.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that he has filed the necessary returns in accordance with law pursuant to the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bengaluru. However, the case of the petitioner was taken up for consideration by respondent No.1-authority and notice under Sec. 142(1) of the I.T. Act dtd. 27/3/2022 was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to furnish the particulars or show cause on or before 28/3/2022 by 10.00 am. It is noticed that 27/3/2022 was a Sunday and petitioner has been given less than one day to provide necessary particulars. However, petitioner has requested an adjournment to the authorities and sought for seven days time to provide necessary particulars. The authorities on 31/3/2022 issued show cause notice as to why, the returns could not be reconsidered and why the proposed variation could not be made and gave about one hour time for him to provide necessary particulars. As the petitioner was not in a position to provide necessary particulars, order dtd. 31/3/2022 bearing No.ITBA/AST/F/17/2021-22/1042398683(1) vide Annexure-A to the writ petition has been passed by the authorities. Aggrieved by the same the instant writ petition is filed.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that the respondent-authorities have not acted in a reasonable manner and have not provided sufficient opportunity to him to provide necessary documents and if reasonable opportunity is given, he will provide necessary particulars and justify the returns filed by him.