TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 294X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re vital for the communication of notice, summons, requisition, order and other communication by the Department, particularly in case of system generated communications. While the respondents contend that the petitioner did not update the profile and thereby communications were sent through the e-mail id mentioned as default, Ext. P2 personal details in the Income Tax Portal shows primary and secondary e-mail ids and fact remains that the notices and assessment order were not served on these e-mail ids. It is not evident as to when the changes in the personal details were made in the web portal. Since the petitioner did not receive notices, the petitioner did not get opportunity to put forth its response to the same. Thus, there is violatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner contends that, Ext. P3 notice under section 148 dated 24.03.2020 issued by the 1st respondent, the Income Tax Officer, Ward I(1), Thrissur, was not received by the petitioner. The previous auditors of the petitioner received Ext. P4 notice u/s 142 (1) dated 21.09.2021 of the 2nd respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, and forwarded the same to the petitioner. On receipt of Exts. P3 and P4 notices, the petitioner met and apprised the 2nd respondent that the notices were served on the previous auditors and not at the e-mail id mentioned in the Income Tax web portal. However, the 2nd respondent issued Ext. P6 assessment order dated 30.09.2021 confirming the proposal and served the same physically. 2. The pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is also contended that there is no service of notice as contemplated under Rule 127 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('Rules', for short). 4. A statement dated 06.12.2021 was also filed on behalf of the 2nd respondent producing the copy of the notices under Sections 142 (1) and 143 (2). A reply affidavit is filed by the petitioner to the said statement stating that those notices are served manually and that the address in the portal is contemplated for service of notice electronically and not manually. 5. Heard Sri. Anil D. Nair, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Jose Joseph, the learned standing counsel for the respondents. 6. Sri. Anil D. Nair refers to section 282 of the Act and Rule 127 of the Rules. Rul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se Joseph would contend that the petitioner had not intimated the assessing officer with regard to change in e-mail id. Sri. Jose Joseph also relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v. I-ven Interactive Limited [(2019) 418 ITR 662 (SC), wherein the Court has held that in the absence of any intimation to the assessing officer with respect to change in address, the assessing officer was justified in issuing notice at the address available as per the PAN database. 8. According to the petitioner, Ext. P2 is the copy of the personal details of the petitioner available in the Income Tax Portal. It contains primary and secondary e-mail ids. However, the communications are delivered by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18. Viewed in the entire conspectus of the circumstances that surround the order of assessment, this Court is of the opinion that, though the assessing officer cannot be faulted, petitioner did not get an effective opportunity to put forth his response for the year 2017-18. Since the assessment order is the platform from which the rights and obligations of not only the assessee but also of the department arise, it is essential that such a platform is built upon strong foundations, especially when the amount involved is large. The burden of an assessment order issued without hearing the assessee will fall, not only upon the petitioner alone but even upon the system itself and may create further waste of resources. Without ventur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
