Case Law Details
P M Agency Vs ITO (Kerala High Court)
Introduction: In a recent ruling, the Kerala High Court addressed a case where the validity of reassessment notices sent to a registered email address was questioned. The petitioner contended that the registered email address was created by an outsider, leading to non-receipt of the notices. The court was tasked with determining the legality of the notices and whether they violated the principles of natural justice.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Background: The petitioner, in this case, challenged the validity of an assessment order and associated demand notices for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary argument was that the registered email address (aalfp1004g@gmail.com) was created by an external party, which resulted in the petitioner not receiving the notices. This, in turn, prevented the petitioner from responding to the show cause notices and ultimately led to the finalization of the assessment order.
2. Legal Proceedings: The petitioner’s assessment was reopened under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, the assessment order was issued under Section 147, along with Sections 144 and 144B of the Act. All communication, including statutory notices and show cause notifications, were sent electronically to the registered email address.
3. Court’s Ruling: The court examined the case and found that all communications and notices related to the assessment proceedings for the 2017-18 assessment year were served through the registered email address. The assessment order had been completed using this method. The court, based on these facts, concluded that there was no merit in the petitioner’s argument. As a result, the writ petition was dismissed.
Conclusion: The Kerala High Court’s ruling reaffirms the validity of notices and communications sent to a registered email address, even if the address is created by a third party. The court found that the use of the registered email address with the Income Tax Department’s e-filing portal was legally sound. This judgment underscores the importance of maintaining accurate and secure communication channels with tax authorities, ensuring that notices and updates are duly received and addressed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT
1. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugning Exts.P3 assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 and the demand notices Exts.P1 and P2 pursuant to the said assessment order.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the e-mail id registered with the department ie. aalfp1004g@gmail.com, was created by an outsider and therefore the petitioner did not receive the notices issued to him and therefore, he could not file reply to the said show cause notices and the assessment order has been finalised. The learned counsel further submits that there has been violation of principles of natural justice. The impugned order may be set aside and the matter may be remanded back for affording an opportunity to the petitioner to file his reply to the said notices for passing a fresh assessment order.
3. On the other hand, Sri. Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department submitted that the petitioner’s assessment was reopened under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ for short). The assessment order was passed on 26.04.2023 under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144B of the Act. Every communications were sent to the petitioner, including notices electronically, through the registered email id with e-filing portal ie. aalfp1004g@gmail.com. As the petitioner did not responded to any of the notices and communications, the assessment order has been finalised.
4. I have considered the submissions on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents.
5. On the e-filing portal of the asssessee, the only email id registered is aalfp1004g@gmail.com. The communications and notices have been sent to the registered email id of the petitioner-assessee. From the records available on the system/ITBA, it can be seen that, all communications including statutory notices and show causes in connection with the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2017-18 were served through the registered e-mail id of the petitioner. Assessment under Section 147 read with Section 144 and 144B of the Act was completed in the case by Ext.P3 order dated 26.04.2023.
6. Considering the above facts, I find no substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Therefore, this writ petition fails, which is hereby dismissed.
