Bombay High Court

NEHA RAJ THAKURversusASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPT AND ORS

Decided: 16 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The assessment order dated 12 March 2026 is quashed as it was passed in gross violation of natural justice and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act.

Summary

The petitioner, Neha Raj Thakur, challenged an income tax assessment order dated 12 March 2026, alleging denial of a personal hearing because the video‑conference link was sent after the scheduled time, and contending that only four days were given to respond to a show‑cause notice contrary to the CBDT SOP requiring seven days. The court examined whether these procedural lapses violated the principles of natural justice and the provisions of Section 144B of the Income Tax Act. It found that the delayed VC link made a hearing impossible and that the shortened response period breached the SOP and natural justice. Consequently, the assessment order and all consequential notices were quashed. The matter was remanded for a fresh assessment with a mandated personal hearing, a two‑week window to file a response, and a deadline of 30 November 2026 for completion.

Issues considered

Whether the failure to provide a timely video‑conference link denied the petitioner a personal hearing in violation of natural justice and Section 144B of the Income Tax Act.
Whether the four‑day period to respond to the show‑cause notice contravened the CBDT Standard Operating Procedure and the principles of natural justice.
Whether the assessment order passed under such procedural deficiencies is liable to be set aside.
Whether the penalty notices issued under Sections 270A and 271AAC(1) are invalid due to the procedural violations.

Legislation cited

Income Tax Act, 1961 — s. 143(3), 144B, 156, 270A, 271AAC(1)

Subjects

natural justice
personal hearing
video conference
assessment order
Income Tax Act
Section 144B
show cause notice
penalty provisions
procedural fairness
writ petition
Article 226

Judgment

1.wp.5889.26.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5889 OF 2026

Neha Raj Thakur .. Petitioner

Versus

Assessment Unit, Income Tax
Department, New Delhi & Ors .. Respondents

Mr. Devendra Jain (through VC), i/b. Kumar Kale ,
Advocates for the Petitioner.

Mr. Akhileshwar Sharma, Advocates for the Respondents /
Revenue.

Digitally signed
ANJALI by ANJALI
TUSHAR CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA &
TUSHAR ASWALE
ASWALE Date: 2026.09.18
12:55:41 +0530
FARHAN P. DUBASH, JJ.
DATE: SEPTEMBER 16, 2026

P. C.

1. Rule. Respondents waive service. With the consent of the parties,

Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally.

2. This Writ Petition challenges Assessment Order dated 12 th March

2026 passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax

Act, 1961 (for short “the IT Act”), passed by Respondent No.1 and also the

consequential Notice of Demand dated 12 th March 2026 issued under Section

156 of the IT Act. Further, the Show Cause Notices dated 12 th March 2026 for
Page 1 of 7
SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
Aswale
1.wp.5889.26.doc

initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A and 271AAC(1) of the IT

Act are also assailed.

3. Mr. Devendra Jain, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner

submitted that Respondent No.1 passed the impugned Assessment Order

dated 12th March 2026 in gross violation of the principles of natural justice as

well as the provisions of Section 144B of the IT Act. He further submitted that

on 24th February 2026, a request was made to Respondent No.1 by the

Petitioner for a personal hearing through Video Conference (for short “VC”)

so that the Petitioner could properly explain her case. Accordingly,

Respondent No.1 scheduled a VC on 27th February 2026 at 3:00 PM. It was

further informed by Respondent No.1 that the VC link and the VC password

would be displayed 2 hours prior to the VC scheduled time.

4. The Petitioner submitted that Respondent No.1 sent an email

from its official email ID efilingwebmanager@ incometax.gov.in to the

email ID of the Petitioner enclosing the link and password of the VC at 4:15

p.m. on 27th February 2026, for the VC scheduled at 3:00 p.m. i.e., more than

one hour after the scheduled time of the VC. The copy of the email received

from efilingwebmanager@ incometax.gov.in is annexed in the Petition. The

Petitioner submitted that she has not received any other communication by

Page 2 of 7
SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
Aswale
1.wp.5889.26.doc

way of email or SMS or any other mode from Respondent No.1 providing the

VC link and the VC password, and therefore, was unable to avail the personal

hearing at the scheduled time. Thus, effectively, the Petitioner was denied an

opportunity of being heard before passing the impugned Assessment Order.

5. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submitted that the

Show Cause Notice dated 20th February, 2026 was received by the Petitioner

on the same date at 1:50 p.m., via email, and the time allowed for filing a

response to this Show Cause Notice was allowed till 12:03 p.m. on 24 th

February 2026. The Petitioner was, therefore, allowed only four days’ time to

respond to this Show Cause Notice. Since 21 st February 2026 and 22nd

February 2026 were Saturday and Sunday, the Petitioner was effectively

allowed only 2 working days to respond to this Show Cause Notice. The

Petitioner submitted her reply to the Show Cause Notice, to the extent it was

possible in the limited time available. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner

submitted that this act of Respondent No.1 was thus in clear violation of the

Standard Operating Procedure dated 3 rd August 2022 (for short ‘SOP’)

issued by the CBDT. Paragraph No.1.3 of the SOP clearly provides that a

response time of 7 days [from the date of issuance of the Show Cause Notice]

should be provided to the Assessee to submit his reply. For all the aforesaid

reasons, the Writ Petition be allowed, was the submission of the Petitioner.

Page 3 of 7
SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
Aswale
1.wp.5889.26.doc

6. On the other hand, Mr. Sharma, the learned Counsel appearing

on behalf of the Revenue, on instructions from Respondent No. 2, the

Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, states that the system records that the VC

was scheduled for 27.02.2026 at 03:00 p.m. and an SMS intimating the VC

was sent on 26.02.2026 at 05:40 p.m. However, the exact delivery time of the

VC notice/link on the e-Filing portal is not presently available in ITBA. Mr.

Sharma, however, submitted that due to a technical glitch, at times, the

delivery of email containing the link and password of the VC is delayed.

7. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and also

perused the papers and the proceedings in the above Writ Petition. We find

that the Petitioner’s grievance in this Writ Petition is well-founded. We find

that Respondent No.1 had scheduled the VC at 3:00 p.m. on 27 th February

2026, but the link and password for this VC was sent to the Petitioner by

email at 4:15 p.m. on 27th February 2026, making it impossible for the

Petitioner to access the scheduled VC. This effectively denied the Petitioner a

personal hearing that is mandated by the law. We also find merit in the

argument advanced on behalf of the Petitioner that Respondent No.1 ought

to have provided at least 7 days’ time to respond to the Show Cause Notice as

per the SOP dated 3rd August 2022. Respondent No.1 had, however, provided

Page 4 of 7
SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
Aswale
1.wp.5889.26.doc

only 4 days’ time to the Petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice dated

24th February 2026, which is contrary to the SOP. We, therefore, find that in

the present case, the impugned Assessment Order dated 12 th March 2026 was

passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, and therefore,

requires interference by this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India.

8. In view of the foregoing discussion, the following order is passed:

a) The impugned Assessment Order dated 12 th March 2026 is

hereby quashed and set aside. Since we have quashed the

Assessment Order, all proceedings/Notices/Orders emanating

therefrom cannot survive, and therefore, are also quashed and

set aside.

b) The assessment proceedings are remanded to Respondent No.1

for passing a fresh Assessment Order in strict compliance of the

provisions of Section 144B of the IT Act.

c) The Petitioner shall file her response to the Show Cause Notice

within a period of two weeks from the date when the Income Tax

Page 5 of 7
SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
Aswale
1.wp.5889.26.doc

Department opens the Portal to enable the Petitioner to file her

response.

d) Respondent No.1 shall grant a personal hearing to the Petitioner

by giving 7 days’ prior notice.

e) Respondent No.1 shall pass a fresh Assessment Order after

considering the Petitioner’s response to the Show Cause Notice

as well as the submissions, if any, made during the personal

hearing.

f) This entire exercise shall be completed by Respondent No.1 on

or before 30th November 2026.

9. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms and the Writ

Petition is also disposed of in terms thereof. However, there shall be no order

as to costs.

10. A copy of this order shall be submitted by the Petitioner to

Respondent No. 2, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer who shall forthwith

transmit/ convey this order to the NFAC for reopening the portal for the

Page 6 of 7
SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
Aswale
1.wp.5889.26.doc

Petitioner to submit her response.

11. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/

Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax

or email of a digitally signed copy of this order.

[FARHAN P. DUBASH, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]

Page 7 of 7
SEPTEMBER 16, 2026
Aswale

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.