Petitioner’s fails to Update Email Address; Kerala HC Dismisses Writ Petition

In the case of Lakeshore Hospital And Research Centre Limited vs. ACIT (Kerala High Court), the petitioner, Lakeshore Hospital, challenged the assessment order and demand notice issued under the Income Tax Act, 1961. The matter arose following the introduction of the Faceless Assessment Scheme, under which the petitioner’s assessments were handled by the Income Tax Department electronically.

Lakeshore Hospital, represented as the petitioner, operates a hospital and was previously assessed by the 3rd respondent under the Income Tax Act. Subsequently, under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, the assessments were transferred to the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent. The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the hospital, acting as the Principal Officer, had provided their official email address to the Income Tax Department for communication purposes.

The assessment for the assessment year 2022-2023 was initially processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and was then selected for complete scrutiny under the Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (CASS) category. The petitioner received notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act (Ext.P1 and Ext.P3 respectively) and responded accordingly with Ext.P2 and Ext.P4 submissions.

During this process, the CFO resigned, effective from 15.11.2023. Subsequent notices, Ext.P5 and Ext.P6, along with a show cause notice under Section 144 of the Act (Ext.P7), were sent to the former CFO’s defunct email address. The petitioner claimed they did not receive these notices in a timely manner due to the inactive email account, which led to inadvertent non-compliance with the requirements to respond to these notices.