Order Confirming Demand of Tax, Interest & Penalty to Be Set Aside If It Didn’t Contain Reasons for Rejecting Assessee’s Reply | HC

Case Details: Rainbow Stones (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC) - [2024] 160 taxmann.com 48 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
  • Adithya Reddy for the Petitioner.
  • Mrs K. Vasanthamala for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the present case, the petitioner filed writ petition and challenged assessment order primarily on the ground that the said order was unseasoned. It was also contended that assessing officer merely referred to reply to show cause notice and recorded that reply was not acceptable.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the said order did not contain any reasons for rejecting petitioner’s reply and for confirming proposed levy of tax, interest and penalty. It was merely mentioned that such reply was not acceptable and didn’t contain any reasons for rejecting the petitioner’s reply and for confirming the proposed levy of tax, interest and penalty notwithstanding such reply.

Therefore, the impugned order, which was completely unseasoned, was to be set aside and matter was remanded for reconsideration and revenue was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to petitioner.