Costs To Be Imposed On A.O, If Orders are Passed Without Application Of Mind- Hon. Bombay HC


By CA Milind Wadhwani

Executive Summary

Assessment orders passed without application of mind liable to be set aside and invite substantial costs to be imposed on such AO

Mantra Industries Ltd. vs NFAC W.P. NO.1625 OF 2021 order dated 11.10.21 Bombay HC

Brief Facts of The Case

i) A.Y 2018-19;
ii) On 22.04.2021(Friday) A Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued to the assessee;
iii) SCN as to why assessment shouldn’t be completed as per the draft assessment order(DAO);
iv) Assessee was to submit response by 23:59 Hours of 24.04.21(Fourth Saturday);
v) Further It was advised that assessee may request for personal hearing;
vi) On 23.04.21 Assessee sought 20 days-time due to Covid-19 to fulfil requirements of notice;
vii) Assessee also objected to modification and also requested for personal hearing;
viii) On 27.04.21Assessee furnished the details sought in the notice;
ix) On 08.06.2021 Assessment order u/s 144was passed;(Six weeks after SCN, though only two days were given to file reply;
x) The Assessment order was verbatim same as DAO except one sentence that SCN was issued on 22.04.21 but the assessee didn’t furnish quantitative details

Contentions Raised by the Petitioner Assessee:

Principles of Natural Justice not followed as :

i) Adjournment request not considered;
ii) Request for personal hearing not considered;
iii) Reply/ Objection filed against DAO not considered while passing the assessment order.

Contentions raised by the revenue:

i) Both the replies filed by the assessee were considered and placed on record;
ii) Assessee did not furnish quantitative details and also no justification was given by assessee for such non-compliance;
iii) Therefore assessment is completed u/s 144 of The Act.

Observations of the Hon. Bombay High Court:

i) Submissions of the Revenue are not unacceptable.
ii) The Assessment order was passed without application of mind as;
iii) Replies and objections not considered while passing assessment orders;
iv) Personal Hearing not allowed;
v) The order dated 08.06.21 is non-Est as it is passed without following procedure u/s 144B and therefore is set-aside;
vi) Instruction was given to Senior Counsel appearing for The NFAC that
Quote “to circulate this order right from the Revenue Secretary to everybody in the Finance Ministry, that if such orders are continued to be passed, this Court will be constrained to impose substantial costs on the concerned Assessing Officer to be recovered from his/her salary and also direct the department to place such judicial orders in the career records of such Assessing Officer.” Unquote
■■
Summarized By CA Milind Wadhwani
DISA(ICAI), FAFD(ICAI), Research (Ph.D.) Scholar
Mobile +91 9826273333
Mail ID: – MILIND.WADHWANI20@GMAIL.COM

About the Author: CA Milind Wadhwani DISA(ICAI), FAFD(ICAI), Research (Ph.D.) Scholar Mobile +91 9826273333 Mail ID: - MILIND.WADHWANI20@GMAIL.COM

Pdf file of article: Click here to Download

Posted on: October 27th, 2021


Disclaimer: This article is only for general information and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers desiring legal advice should consult with an experienced professional to understand the current law and how it may apply to the facts of their case. Neither the author nor itatonline.org and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any inaccurate or incomplete information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. No part of this document should be distributed or copied (except for personal, non-commercial use) without express written permission of itatonline.org
3 comments on “Costs To Be Imposed On A.O, If Orders are Passed Without Application Of Mind- Hon. Bombay HC
  1. K R RAO says:

    MAY BE H.C IS MISGUIDED AND MISREPRESENTED. AO’s ORDER IS JUDICIAL ORDER. CAN COSTS BE IMPOSED. HAS S.C IMPOSED COSTS ON HC JUDGES WHERE ORDERS ARE REVERSED?

  2. Ajoy Ghosh says:

    Absolutely agree with Mr K R Rao. May be AO’s opinion is not sustainable but this is judicial order on behalf of Tax Authority, wrong order or biased order challengeable but AO on what merit be held personally liable for cost. At the same time there have got to be some mechanism in place so that rising tendency on the part of the Department passing order without application of mind.

  3. G C Das says:

    There is a limit to the harassment meted out to tax payers. It has become a regular practice not to address to the relevant issues raised before the AO and CIT (A). Even judicial precedents are not distinguished in majority of cases. It is not a case of to compare with the cases decided by HCs. The cases decided by HC are also reversed. One should not compare an Assessing officer with a judicial officer in the matter. Whoever he may be gross negligence to address to rudimentary facts/issues should not be glossed over.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*