Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeDirect TaxBombay High Court Quashes Order Made By Officer Who Had Never Heard...

Bombay High Court Quashes Order Made By Officer Who Had Never Heard Petitioner, Directs CBDT To Reconsider

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Bombay High Court while directing the matter back to the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) quashed the order made by an officer who had never heard the Petitioner.

The bench of Justice M.S.Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain has quashed the order on the grounds that the order was made by an officer who had never heard the Petitioner. There was no material on record to show that the Member of CBDT had made the order. The material only indicates that the order was approved by such Member. 

The Petitioner/assessee has challenged the order, which is signed by Mr Virender Singh, Additional CIT (ITA Cell), CBDT, New Delhi, refusing to condone the delay of about 1585 days in filing a revised return under Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2015-2016.

The order has been made by quoting Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, which empowers the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to condone such delay to avoid genuine hardship to the assesses.

The Petitioner submitted that the order was neither made by the CBDT nor its member. This is a good ground to set aside the order and remit the matter to CBDT for disposal of the Petitioner’s application seeking condonation of delay. 

The court held that order should generally be made after compliance with principles of natural justice and fair play. The fact that Section 119(2) does not explicitly refer to any show cause notice or opportunity of hearing is not grounds for non- compliance with principles of natural justice. In the absence of any provision to the contrary, principles should be read into the unoccupied interstices of a statute.

The court remanded the matter back to the CBDT for fresh consideration of the Petitioner’s application for condonation of delay.

Read More: Pre-SCN reply To Be Considered Before Issuing SCN Under GST: Calcutta High Court

Case Details

Case Title:  Bharat Education Society Versus AO

Case No.: Writ Petition (L) No. 21487 Of 2024

Date: 23/01/2025

Counsel For Petitioner: Nitesh Joshi

Counsel For Respondent: Dinesh R. Gulabani

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 21 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 21, 2026.GSTSUPREME COURT UPHOLDS HC’S REFUSAL...

Serious Investigative Lapses: Supreme Court Orders De Novo Probe Into 2012 Rape-Murder of 17-Year-Old

The Supreme Court has ordered a de novo investigation into the 2012 rape and...

Conflict Between Trade Marks Act S. 134 and Commercial Courts Act on Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Refers to Larger Bench

The Supreme Court has referred to a Larger Bench an important question concerning the...

Supreme Court Clarifies S. 28A Land Acquisition Limitation

The Supreme Court has clarified the scope of Section 28A of the Land Acquisition...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : 21 SEPTEMBER, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for  September 21, 2026.GSTSUPREME COURT UPHOLDS HC’S REFUSAL...

Serious Investigative Lapses: Supreme Court Orders De Novo Probe Into 2012 Rape-Murder of 17-Year-Old

The Supreme Court has ordered a de novo investigation into the 2012 rape and...

Conflict Between Trade Marks Act S. 134 and Commercial Courts Act on Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Refers to Larger Bench

The Supreme Court has referred to a Larger Bench an important question concerning the...