Case Law Details
Sakthi Steel Trading Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
Department to serve Notice through other modes of communication if Assessee fails to respond to communication sent through E-mail
The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sakthi Steel Trading v. Assistant Commissioner [W.P. No. 4122 of 2022 dated January 29, 2024] allowed the writ petition, thereby holding that, the Revenue Department should at least serve notice on Assessee through other modes of communication prescribed if the Assessee fails to respond to summon, order, notice or any other communication sent to them through E-mail. The court’s ruling underscores the need for flexibility in tax administration, particularly concerning small businesses’ technological limitations.
Facts:
Sakthi Steel Trading (“the Petitioner”) has filed a writ petition against order dated January 29, 2022 (“the Impugned Order”) contending that, notice sent by the Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) was sent on common portal but the Petitioner was unaware of the notice issued, therefore, the Impugned Order was passed without granting any opportunity to file reply.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
