9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 90X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is of no consequence, since, the period of eight (8) days, if reckoned from the date of 21st March, 2022 would expire on 29th March, 2022. Therefore, even on respondent s showing the e-portal could not have been closed on 26th March, 2022. Also noticed that while in its reply-affidavit, though the respondent places heavy reliance upon the service of notice on 21st March, 2022 through speed post bearing no. ED906740645IN, however, the order passed under Section 148A(d) of the Act refers to the service of notice effected on 24th March, 2022 through speed post bearing no. ED853116135IN. The said order makes no reference to the other speed post receipt. Therefore, the Assessing Officer himself relied upon service of notice issued to the petitioner by speed post vide Consignment No. ED853116135IN, which is admittedly received by the petitioner on 24 th March, 2022 and therefore the Respondent cannot contend to the contrary in the present proceedings. Respondent has not disputed that the petitioner is a non resident and was stationed in the United States of America, when the notice was issued and received at the Delhi address. The status of the petitioner being non-resident is also duly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... referred to as 'the Act') as well as Notice dated 31st March, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act for the assessment year 2015-16. Notice was issued in this matter and the Respondents-Revenue (hereinafter referred to as 'Respondents') have filed their reply-affidavit and the Petitioner-Assessee (hereinafter referred to as 'Petitioner') has filed his rejoinder. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice as it has been passed without providing adequate opportunity to the petitioner in contravention of the provisions of Section 148A of the Act to file a reply to the notice dated 17th March, 2022 issued under Section 148A(b) of the Act. He submits that the said notice sent by speed post through ED853116135IN was received by speed-post on 24th March, 2022 at the Delhi Address of petitioner. He however, submits that it is an admitted position that the petitioner is not a resident Indian and is employed in the United States of America. It is further submitted that both his parents were also with him in the United States of America during this relevant period and his address in Delhi was being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in view of the fact that neither the petitioner nor his parents were in Delhi at the relevant time, the petitioner is unable to confirm the fact about the alleged receipt of notice on 21st March, 2022. He further contends that without prejudice to his rights and contentions, assuming that the notice was served on 21st March, 2022, even on that count, the e-portal could not have been closed by the Assessing Officer before 29th March, 2022 i.e. eight days from the service of notice. He submits that the impugned order under Section 148 (d) of the Act though passed on 31st March 2022 fails to take note of the request for extension of time sent by e-mail on 27th March 2022. He therefore, submits that since there has been gross violation of principles of natural justice, the impugned order may be set aside. 8. The respondent has filed a reply-affidavit and has raised an objection to the maintainability of the petition on the ground that the petitioner herein has withheld the fact as regards the receipt of notice dated 17th March, 2022 on 21st March, 2022 sent by speed post bearing no. ED906740645IN. 9. He admits that the notice under Section 148A (b) of the Act was not served by e-ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nable time for an assessee residing abroad. In these circumstances a request for extension of time to file reply should have been considered by the Assessing Officer for granting a reasonable extension. The submission of the respondent that the Assessing Officer does not review his e-mails and therefore, the request for extension dated 27.03.2022 made through e-mail is not a valid request cannot be accepted. The communication between the Assessee and the Assessing Officer through emails is an established procedure and is evident from the documents annexed by the petitioner with the rejoinder, it is a valid means of communication used by the Assessing officer to communicate with the Petitioner. 13. The Respondent itself issues notices under Section 148A (b) to the assessee through emails and therefore a submission that if a reply or request is sent to the assessing officer on his official email address, he is not obliged to consider such email cannot be accepted. 14. This court in W.P. (C) No. 7406/2022 in Divya Capital One Private Limited (Earlier Known As Divya Portfolio Private Limited) vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 7(1) Delhi & Anr. has held as under :- "Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
