Income Tax | Serving SCN On Old Email After Updation Is Invalid, Despite Earlier Acknowledgement: Kerala High Court
The Kerala Excessive Courtroom acknowledged that reply to at least one SCN on previous e-mail can not justify non-service of subsequent discover on up to date e-mail.
Justice Ziyad Rahman A.A. acknowledged that “one of many notices issued below Part 142(1) of the Revenue Tax Act was certainly served to the assessee in the previous e-mail ID, which was after updating the e-mail ID. The assessee additionally submitted a response to the stated discover as nicely. Nevertheless, that by itself can not be a purpose to reject the contentions put ahead by the assessee.”
The assessee/petitioner has filed the writ petition on the bottom that he was not served with the present trigger discover below Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Revenue Tax Act on the e-mail handle, which was newly created by them, regardless of intimation on this regard.
In accordance to the assessee, the brand new e-mail IDs had been up to date within the portal. Regardless of the above, when the present trigger discover was issued, by the division, it was once more issued within the previous e-mail ID with out sending the identical within the up to date e-mail ID.
Subsequently, in line with the assessee the stated present trigger discover was not obtained by the assessee and therefore no reply may very well be submitted by them, which in the end resulted within the evaluation order.
The division argued that one of many notices was served within the previous e-mail ID, even after updating the e-mail, however they obtained the identical and responded to the stated discover. Subsequently, even after the updating the e-mail ID the assessee was sustaining the previous e-mail ID as nicely. Subsequently, the rivalry that present trigger discover despatched within the previous e-mail ID was not obtained by them can’t be accepted.
This is especially as a result of, the truth that, the assessee had intimated the change of e-mail ID to the respondent, just isn’t disputed. It is usually an admitted truth that, the present trigger discover was issued solely within the previous e-mail ID and with out sending the identical within the new e-mail ID. Subsequently, there isn’t any purpose to discard the contentions raised by the assessee with regard to the non-receipt of present trigger discover, added the bench.
The bench noticed that the proceedings had been finalized with none response from the a part of the assessee as in opposition to the present trigger discover as nicely.
In view of the above, the bench allowed the petition and directed the division to subject a recent present trigger discover within the new e-mail ID.
Case Title: Mediacloud Studio Personal Restricted v. The Evaluation Unit
Case Quantity: WP(C) NO. 17312 OF 2025
Counsel for Petitioner/ Assessee: Aditya Unnikrishnan, Nivedita A. Kamath, Saritha Ok.S., Binisha Child, Aravind Rajagopalan Menon and Anil D. Nair
Counsel for Respondent/ Division: Jose Joseph and Cyriac Tom
