Access to notices under Section 142(1) during COVID led to quashing of assessment and remand for fresh hearing. Notices issued under Section 142(1) were not received by the taxpayer due to the authorised chartered accountant failing to access electronic notices ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Access to notices under Section 142(1) during COVID led to quashing of assessment and remand for fresh hearing.
Notices issued under Section 142(1) were not received by the taxpayer due to the authorised chartered accountant failing to access electronic notices during the COVID 19 waves; the High Court found procedural unfairness and quashed the assessment order and demand notice issued under Section 221(1), remanding the matter for a fresh adjudication on merits within eight weeks. The impugned order is to be treated as a show cause notice for the taxpayer to respond, and the taxpayer must furnish requested information and cooperate with the revenue for the fresh proceeding.
Issues involved: The petitioner challenges the Impugned Assessment Order dated 26.04.2021, claiming unawareness of the order due to communication issues during the Covid-19 pandemic. The respondent contends that the petitioner had ample opportunities to respond to notices under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act but failed to do so, justifying the Impugned Order.
Details of the Judgment:
Issue 1: Communication issues during the Covid-19 pandemic The petitioner asserts that due to confusion caused by the pandemic, notices sent to the registered e-mail were not accessed by the Chartered Accountant, leading to the petitioner's unawareness of the Impugned Order. The petitioner requests another opportunity to explain the case, emphasizing that the partners had contributed capital to the firm.
Issue 2: Adequacy of notices and petitioner's response The respondent argues that multiple notices were issued under Section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, with a final opportunity given to furnish documents. Despite these notices, the petitioner failed to respond, resulting in the Impugned Order. The respondent contends that the writ petition should be dismissed due to the petitioner's delay in filing an appeal.
Judgment: After considering the arguments, the Court finds the petitioner's explanation reasonable, noting that all notices were sent to the registered e-mail, operated by the Chartered Accountant. Given the circumstances of the pandemic waves, the Court quashes the Impugned Order and Demand Notice, remanding the case for a fresh order within eight weeks. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the respondent and treat the quashed order as a Show Cause Notice. The writ petition is allowed with no costs, and connected petitions are closed.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.