Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2023 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 285 - MADRAS HIGH COURTAssessment u/s 144B - petitioner's claim is that they have not been served with the prior notice and have been prevented them from putting forth their case - HELD THAT:- This statement appears to be incorrect in the light of the proof of mail communications submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent where every proceedings has been communicated under the cover of a letter/e- mail, to which the orders were attached. Therefore, prima facie, the contention of the appellant appears to be incorrect. As per petitioner they have not been served with the provisions of Section 144 (B) (7) relating to the real time alert - Section 144 (B) (10) defining a real time alert. Therefore, the real time alerts could be in the form of a SMS or an update on the mobile app or by way of an E-Mail to the registered e-mail address. In the instant case, the documents filed on the side of the respondents relating to the proof of mail communication would show substantial compliance of this rule. Be that as it may, as pointed out by the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, the petitioner has an alternative remedy in the form of an appeal u/s 246(A) of the Income Tax Act. A reading of the impugned order would show that it is a detailed speaking order and the petitioner has to only challenge the same by way of an appeal and not by invoking an extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Present writ petition stands dismissed with a direction to the petition to approach the appellate authority.
|