Delhi High Court Sets Aside Assessment Order Due to Notice Sent to Incorrect Email Address.

Court Name : Delhi High Court

Parties : Jyoti Narang Vs ITO

Decision Date : 14 July 2023

Judgement ref : W.P.(C) 9289/2023

Imagine you're an assessee and you've just found out that an assessment order has been passed against you. But there's a catch: you never received the notice because it was sent to the wrong email address. What happens next?

This was the situation in a recent case before the Delhi High Court. The assessee, M/s. Paramount Communication Pvt. Ltd., had an assessment order passed against them. However, they claimed that they never received the notice because it was sent to an incorrect email address.

The court examined the facts of the case and found that the notice was indeed sent to the wrong email address. The Department had sent the notice to an email address that was not registered with them. The assessee had no knowledge of the notice or the subsequent proceedings.

The Delhi High Court emphasized the importance of proper communication in legal proceedings. It held that the assessment order was invalid because the assessee was not properly notified. The court set aside the assessment order and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

This case highlights the importance of ensuring that all communication in legal proceedings is done correctly. If you're an assessee, it's crucial to ensure that your contact information is up-to-date with the Department. And if you're a tax or law professional, this case serves as a reminder of the importance of proper communication in your practice.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J. (ORAL):

1. Issue notice.

1.1 Mr Sunil Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel accepts notice on

behalf of the respondent/revenue.

2. In view of the directions that we intend to pass, Mr Agarwal says, that

no counter-affidavit is required to be filed, and he will rely on the record

presently available with the Court.

3. Insofar as the petitioner is concerned, the principal grievance is that

there has been a breach of principles of natural justice.

4. The record shows, that the petitioner was issued a show-cause notice

dated 09.05.2023 (SCN) proposing variation in income.

4.1 Via the SCN, the petitioner was given time to file a response, albeit

by 16.05.2023 (12:04 Hrs.).

5. However, it appears that the notice was directed to an incorrect email

address. The e-mail address to which the SCN was directed is

“dadasumit75@gmail.com”.

6. According to the petitioner, the correct e-mail address is

“hridaanfurnitures@gmail.com”.

6.1 The petitioner claims, that even in the return of income filed by her,

the same e-mail address is given i.e., “hridaanfurnitures@gmail.com”.

7. Consequently, the submission is that the petitioner had no opportunity

to respond to the SCN, and therefore seek a personal hearing in the matter.

8. Mr Sunil Agarwal, learned senior standing counsel, who appears on

behalf of the respondent/revenue, says that on merits, there is a lot to be

said, though that stage will arise, once a response is filed.

9. In view of the above, according to us, the best way forward would be

to set aside the impugned assessment order, and grant an opportunity to the

petitioner to file a response to the SCN.

10. It is ordered accordingly.

11. The impugned order dated 23.05.2023 is set aside.

11.1 Consequently, the penalty and demand notices of even date, i.e.,

23.05.2023, shall also collapse.

12. The petitioner will file a response to the aforementioned SCN, within

the next four weeks.

13. The Assessing Officer (AO) will open the designated portal to enable

the petitioner to upload the response. The AO will also issue a notice to the petitioner, indicating therein, the date and time of hearing.

14. Consequently, the impugned demand and penalty notice will also

collapse.

15. Needless to add, the AO will pass a speaking order; a copy of which

will be served on the petitioner.

16. The above-captioned writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid

terms.

17. Parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

JULY 14, 2023

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

% Date of Decision: 14.07.2023

+ W.P.(C) 9289/2023 & CM Appl.35372/2023

JYOTI NARANG ..... Petitioner

Through: Mr Prakash Kumar Sinha with Mr

Ajay Kumar, Mr Kartik Garg and Ms

Vartika Jain, Advs.

versus

INCOME TAX OFFICER ..... Respondent

Through: Mr Sunil Agarwal, Sr Standing

Counsel.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]