Section 148A Notices; Assessee’s Duty to Update Address, but Fresh Notice Issued
Issue: Whether notices issued under Section 148A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, are valid when they were not served on the assessee’s email ID or by post due to the assessee’s failure to update their address and email ID with the Income-tax Department.
Facts:
- The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice under Section 148A(b) and subsequently passed an order under Section 148A(d), followed by a reopening notice under Section 148.
- The assessee claimed that the notices were not served on her email ID or by post.
- The revenue submitted that the assessee had not registered her email ID on the e-filing portal and that the postal authorities had returned the notice with the remark “left.”
- The assessee had changed her address but did not inform the Income-tax Department.
Decision:
- The court held that it was the duty of the assessee to inform the Income-tax Department about the change of address and make necessary changes in the PAN card details. Therefore, no fault could be attributed to the revenue for the non-service of the notice.
- However, considering that the assessee was an individual lady and her husband was on a transferable job, the court quashed the impugned notices.
- The revenue was directed to serve subsequent notices on the address and email ID provided by the assessee.
Key Takeaways:
- Assessee’s Duty to Update Information: Assessees are responsible for updating their address and email ID with the Income-tax Department.
- Non-Service Due to Assessee’s Fault: If notices are not served due to the assessee’s failure to update their information, the revenue cannot be faulted.
- Compassionate Approach: The court adopted a compassionate approach, considering the assessee’s personal circumstances.
- Fresh Notice: Despite the assessee’s lapse, the court directed the revenue to issue fresh notices to ensure fairness and compliance with natural justice.
- Balancing Responsibilities: The decision balances the assessee’s responsibility to update information with the revenue’s duty to ensure proper service of notices.
- The court is reinforcing the need for tax payers to update their contact information, but is also showing leniency in this specific case.
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Srimani Basu
v.
Income-tax Officer
M. S. SONAK and Jitendra Jain, JJ.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3286 OF 2024
JANUARY 28, 2025
Tejveer Singh for the Petitioner. Suresh Kumar for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
Jitendra Jain, J. – Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. The Rule is made returnable immediately at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. This Petition is filed by the aggrieved Tax Payer challenging the notice under Section 148A(b) dated 24 January 2023, order Section 148A(d) dated 8 March 2023, consequent notice under Section 148 dated 9 March 2023 and notice under Section 142(1) dated 20 September 2023 for the assessment year 2016-2017.
4. Mr. Singh, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the notice under Sections 148A(b), 148A(d) and 148 were not served either on email-id or by postal and, therefore, the proceedings are bad in law.
5. Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned counsel for the Respondents relying upon affidavit in reply of one Mr. Kundan P. Janrao, Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(3), Pune states that the Petitioner has not registered her email-id on e-filing portal and further postal authorities returned the notice with the remark “left”. He submits that the notices were sent at the address available with the Income-Tax Department and, therefore, the grievance made by the Petitioner is unwarranted.
6. On a query being raised by the Court, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner has changed her address, but same was not informed to the Income-Tax Department and, therefore, the postal authorities may have returned the notices with the remark left. In our view, it was the duty of the Petitioner to inform change about her address to the Income-Tax Department and make necessary changes in the PAN card details. Having not done so, no fault can be attributed to the Respondents on account of non-service of the notices. However, the Petitioner being an individual lady, and her husband being on transferable job by way of giving an opportunity, we pass the following order :-
ORDER
| (i) | Order under Section 148A(d) dated 8 March 2023 and notice under Section 148 dated 9 March 2023 and consequent notice under Section 142(1) dated 20 September 2023 for the assessment year 2016-2017 are quashed. |
| (ii) | At the directions of the Court, Petitioner has given following postal address and email-id on which the subsequent notices can be served. Respondents are directed to communicate with the Petitioner on the following address and the email-id given by the Petitioner. |
“Srimani Basu,
Flat No.A 1001, SM Vision,
Plot No.166, Sector 9, Ulwe – 410 206
District Raigadh, Maharashtra
Email-id: subroto.basu22@gmail.com”
| (iii) | Mr. Singh accepts the service of notice under Section 148A(b) dated 24 January 2023. The Petitioner is directed to file her objections to 148A(b) notice within period of four weeks from the date of uploading of the present order and the Respondents are directed to dispose of the objections within a further period of four weeks from the date of filing the objections. Petitioner would not take the plea of limitation starting from 24 January 2023 till the date of uploading the present order and time frame provided in this order. |
| (iv) | The Petitioner is also directed to make necessary application to the Income-Tax Department for incorporating the change of address and the email-id. |
7. The Petition is made absolute in above terms. No costs.