Case Law Details
Gandhi Realty (India) Private limited Vs Assistant/Joint/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Gujarat High Court)
Sub-section (2) of section 144(B) says that every notice or order or any other electronic communication shall be delivered to the addressee, being the assessee, by way of placing an authenticated copy thereof in the assessee’s registered account; or by sending an authenticated copy thereof to the registered email address of the assessee or his authorised representative; or uploading an authenticated copy on the assessee’s Mobile App. Thus, there is specific requirement for service by electronic mode and in absence of placing before this Court any proof of virtual exchange or authenticated copy of service to the assessee, there is no reason for this Court to accept the version of the respondent about the service.
We are in total disagreement with the revenue that on account of issuance of notice u/s. 143(2) dated 22.09.2019 and opportunities provided earlier to the assessee, acceding to his request would be a mitigating circumstance so far as non-service of the Draft Assessment Order is concerned. The opportunity of furnishing the documents and hearing which has been given time and again and requests acceeded to by the authority to the assessee at that stage would not eventually culminate into furnishing of the final assessment order without service of prior notice along with draft assessment order, if any additions are made to the prejudice of the assessee.
It is a statutory requirement, as discussed hereinabove, more particularly when any assessment order is to be made which is likely to be prejudicial to the interest of the assessee. NFAC if would have served upon the assessee the draft assessment order, its presence on web portal would invariably there. In virtual regime, noticing of or presence or absence of trail of action is not a herculian task. Thus, in absence of any proof, the version of the respondent simply cannot be accepted. We could further notice from the documents which have been furnished by the petitioner that authenticated copy of notice/ order is not served to the petitioner when otherwise all other documents on the web portal of the income tax department are existing. We have sought assistance from the learned advocate of both the sides to point out to us due service of the draft assessment order, as has been claimed by the respondent, however, the said order dated 12.04.21 has been duly served to the petitioner, show cause notice which is claimed to have been issued along with the draft assessment order are surely missing. This being a simple case of statutory non-compliance of the provision, the same would amount to breach of not only principles of natural justice, but also, of the action in complete disregard to the statutory provision. And therefore, the order of the respondent passed without following the mandate given by the statute under section 144B of the Act deserves to be interfered with by quashing and setting aside the same.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
