![]() ![]() Further, the Chief Commissioner or the Director General, in charge of the Regional Faceless Assessment Centre, ‘may’ approve the request for personal hearing if he is of the opinion that the request is covered by the circumstances as laid down by the Principal Chief Commissioner with approval of CBDT. However, on the issue of granting a personal hearing to the assessee, the Revenue was of the view, that under the scheme of faceless assessment, a grant of a personal hearing is not mandatory in every case.Īs per Section 144B(7) of the IT Act, the assessee may request for a personal hearing where a variation is proposed in the draft assessment order and the assessee is issued a show cause notice. During the course of these hearings, the Revenue more or less conceded defeat where the Assessment Orders under challenge were passed without issuance of show cause notice or draft assessment order or any other procedural infirmities. This has led to a whole new series of litigation where almost every other assessment order is being challenged before jurisdictional High Courts on the grounds of violation of principles of natural justice. ![]() ![]() One of them is that assessment orders are being passed without following due process prescribed under Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘IT Act’). Though the underlying intent of the faceless assessment scheme, is no doubt in the right direction, taxpayers have been facing multiple issues. The underlying intention behind this transition was to eliminate exceptionable activities by avoiding high level of personal interaction between taxpayers and the tax officials. The scheme of scrutiny assessment under Income Tax witnessed a paradigm shift with the introduction of faceless assessment. Author – Gopal Mundhra, Partner, Economic Laws Practice ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |