2024 (2) TMI 1344 - HC - Income Tax

Notice of reassessment proceedings issued on a wrong E-mail ID - primary and secondary email ID - there exists two email ID of the petitioner-Company - what is the registered e-mail address of the petitioner as on 07.03.2023 i.e the date of issuance of notice under Section 148A (b) of the Act, 1961? - HELD THAT - If the registered email address of the assessee cannot be determined from (a) e-filing account of the addressee registered in designated portal or (b) from the last income tax return furnished, or (c) from the permanent Account number data base relating to the addressee or (d) from the official website of the Ministry of corporate affairs, etc. then only the authority may resort to any e-mail address made available by the assessee. Further, the word available is of significance as it records a positive action on the part of the assessee in making available the e-mail ID, so that the same may be construed as the registered email ID of the assessee. As far as the present case is concerned, it has been the consistent stand by the petitioner that he has used or made available the e-mail ID [email protected] for e-filing of his income-tax return even since the Assessment Year 2020-21 and the same has been used by him even for filing of the latest income-tax return for the Assessment Year 2022-23. Further, the said email ID has been also mentioned by him in the income-tax return and the same is relatable to PAN data base and also mentioned in the master data of the petitioner s Company as available from the official website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs at the relevant time. Therefore, taking a holistic view of the matter, it has to be held that the e-mail ID [email protected] is the registered e-mail address of the petitioner company and it is the e-mail ID, which has been made available to the Authority by the assessee. Recently, the Delhi High Court in the case of Jyoti Narang Vs Income tax Officer 2023 (7) TMI 1377 - DELHI HIGH COURT has also set aside the penalty and demand notice on the ground that the show cause notice was issued on a wrong E-mail ID. In the present case, the notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, 1961 has not been issued on the registered email address of the petitioner s company. Thus the order passed by the Assessing Authority under Section 148-A (d) and the consequential notice issued under Section 148 as also the consequential proceedings are quashed.

Summary

Issues Involved:

1. Validity of the order dated 26th March 2023 under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Validity of the consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148 of the Act.
3. Proper service of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of the order dated 26th March 2023 under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

The petitioner challenged the order dated 26th March 2023 passed by the Assessing Authority under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The petitioner contended that the order was based on a notice sent to an outdated email address, which was not the registered email address as per the updated records. The court examined the provisions of Section 148A and Section 144B of the Act, emphasizing the importance of serving notices to the registered email address. The court found that the email address used by the department was outdated and not the registered email address of the petitioner as of the date of the notice.

Issue 2: Validity of the consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148 of the Act

The consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148 of the Act was also challenged. The court held that since the foundational notice under Section 148A(b) was not properly served, the subsequent order and notice under Section 148 could not be sustained. The court reiterated that proper service of notice is a jurisdictional requirement, and failure to do so invalidates the subsequent proceedings.

Issue 3: Proper service of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act

The court scrutinized whether the notice under Section 148A(b) was served on the registered email address of the petitioner. It was found that the notice was sent to an outdated email address, despite the petitioner having updated their email address on the Income Tax Department's portal. The court cited several judgments emphasizing the necessity of proper service of notice, concluding that the service of notice on an outdated email address did not meet the legal requirements.

Conclusion:

The court quashed the order dated 26th March 2023 under Section 148-A(d) and the consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148, along with all subsequent proceedings. The parties were directed to revert to the stage of the reply to the notice under Section 148A(b), with the petitioner being given four weeks to file a response. The Assessing Officer was instructed to provide the necessary opportunity for the petitioner to upload the response on the designated portal and to pass an order in terms of Section 148A(d) thereafter. The writ petition was partly allowed, with no order as to costs.