The imposition by the Bombay High court upon the tax council specified that the actual costs on AO and suppressed the Faceless Assessment orders passed excluding the application of mind.
The applicant is the owner of Mantra Industries ltd revocate the Income-tax department’s executions of the penalties with respect to it beneath section 274 read with Section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
The applicant specified that the assessment order was passed excluding the mentioned laws of natural justice relevant to the urge for the adjournment is not get acknowledged. The essential thing is that the answer and objection furnished in answer to the show cause notice through the draft is not getting recognized, said the organization.
“Justice KR Shriram and justice Amit B Borkar directed that the “Respondents are put to notice, and Akhileshwar Sharma (counsel for National Faceless Assessment Centre-NFAC-set up by the Central Board of Direct Taxes -CBDT) 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 (AO) to be recovered from his or her salary and also direct the department to place such judicial orders in the career records of such assessing officer.”
“The assessment order is an exact reproduction of the draft assessment order except for one sentence which has been added ‘Regarding this show cause notice issued to the assessee on 22 April 2021, but assessee has not given any justification for non-furnishing of quantitative details in form 3CD’, Judges specified.”
“The judges stated that We have compared the details provided by Mantra Industries and form 35(b) annexed to the affidavit in rejoinder. We do not find any difference except that in the response dated 27 April 2021, the product manufactured, wet grinders, is mentioned. We have also to note that this is not the case in the assessment order, which has proceeded on the basis that no response at all has been filed to the notice dated 22 April 2021. There cannot be anything far from the truth.”
The high court specified that they are forced to revocate the impugned order along with the significant notices provided via tax heads which is passed dated 8th June 2021.
“Sub-section 9 of section 144B of the Income Tax Act provides that any assessment made shall be non-est (the return of a writ or process) if such assessment is not made in accordance with the procedure laid down under this section”.
“Therefore, the impugned order being non-est, the AO may take such steps as advised in accordance with the law. We are not making any observations on the merits of the case, judges commented on disposing of the application.”
