SANJEEV SIKKA Vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Notice. Shri Ruchir Bhatia, learned senior standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents/revenue and submits that in view of order that we intend to pass, there is no need to file counter-affidavit. With consent of counsel for both sides, the matter is taken up for final hearing and disposal at this stage itself.

(2.) The petitioner, invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India has assailed order dtd. 17/5/2023 passed under Sec. 147 [read with 144B] of the Income Tax Act, 1961, notice dtd. 25/7/2022 issued under Sec. 148 of the Act and order dtd. 25/7/2022 passed under Sec. 148A(d) of the Act, all pertaining to the Assessment Year 2014-15. The petitioner has laid challenge to the above mentioned impugned notice and orders on several grounds, out of which only one ground is taken up, as the same is the most crucial one, based on which the present writ petition can be disposed of.

(3.) It is contended on behalf of petitioner that since the impugned order was passed in gross violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned notice and orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law. It is elaborated on behalf of the petitioner that in terms of notice dtd. 28/4/2023, the petitioner was to submit response on 5/5/2023 and petitioner sought adjournment for 15 days on 5/5/2023 itself on "adjournment request window on e-portal"; that ignoring the adjournment request dtd. 5/5/2023, respondent no. 1 completed the assessment, observing that the petitioner was provided personal hearing through videoconferencing vide show cause notice dtd. 28/4/2023 but petitioner did not file any response or documentary evidence.