AO Can’t Pass Best Judgment Assessment Without Assigning Reasons for Rejecting Voluminous Reply | HC
- News|Blog|Income Tax|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 28 April, 2025
Latest from Taxmann
Case Details: Shantilal Bhikhabhai Nairya vs. Union of India - [2025] 173 taxmann.com 842 (Gujarat)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Bhargav D. Karia & D.N. Ray, JJ.
-
Sahil J. Rao, Adv. for the Petitioner.
-
Karan G. Sanghani, Adv. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee, a proprietor of a manufacturing and trading business of copper and aluminium scrap, filed its return of income declaring total income under the head “Income from Business & Profession”. The assessee received a notice under section 143(2) for scrutiny assessment.
During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) issued a show cause notice proposing additions to the assessee’s income. In response, the assessee filed a voluminous reply raising objections to the proposed additions. After considering the assessee’s reply, the AO passed the assessment order under section 144.
The assessee filed a writ petition before the Gujarat High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the AO passed the order without assigning any reason for not agreeing with the assessee’s reply. This is a breach of the principle of natural justice. The principle of natural justice has twin ingredients: firstly, the person who is likely to be adversely affected by the action of the authorities should be given notice to show cause thereof and granted an opportunity of hearing; secondly, the orders so passed by the authorities should give the reason for arriving at any conclusion showing proper application of mind.
Violation of either of them could, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, vitiate the order itself. Thus, the assessment order passed by the AO was not tenable in the eye of law.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Assistant Commissioner, Commerical Tax Department, Works Contract and Leasing, Kota v. Shukla and Brothers (2010) 4 Supreme Court Cases 785 [Para 16] – followed.
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied
Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India
To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com
CA | CS | CMA
