Notice under Section 148A(b) sent to wrong email ID; order and proceedings quashed under Section 148A(d)

The HC held that the notice under Section 148A(b) was issued on a wrong email ID, not the petitioner company's registered email address as of the notice date. The correct registered email was identified based on consistent use in income tax returns, PAN database, and MCA records. Since the notice was sent to an incorrect email, the HC quashed the order under Section 148A(d), the notice under Section 148, and all consequential proceedings.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Validity of the order dated 26th March 2023 under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Validity of the consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148 of the Act.
3. Proper service of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act.

Summary:

Issue 1: Validity of the order dated 26th March 2023 under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

The petitioner challenged the order dated 26th March 2023 passed by the Assessing Authority under Section 148-A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The petitioner contended that the order was based on a notice sent to an outdated email address, which was not the registered email address as per the updated records. The court examined the provisions of Section 148A and Section 144B of the Act, emphasizing the importance of serving notices to the registered email address. The court found that the email address used by the department was outdated and not the registered email address of the petitioner as of the date of the notice.

Issue 2: Validity of the consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148 of the Act

The consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148 of the Act was also challenged. The court held that since the foundational notice under Section 148A(b) was not properly served, the subsequent order and notice under Section 148 could not be sustained. The court reiterated that proper service of notice is a jurisdictional requirement, and failure to do so invalidates the subsequent proceedings.

Issue 3: Proper service of notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act

The court scrutinized whether the notice under Section 148A(b) was served on the registered email address of the petitioner. It was found that the notice was sent to an outdated email address, despite the petitioner having updated their email address on the Income Tax Department's portal. The court cited several judgments emphasizing the necessity of proper service of notice, concluding that the service of notice on an outdated email address did not meet the legal requirements.

Conclusion:

The court quashed the order dated 26th March 2023 under Section 148-A(d) and the consequential notice dated 29th March 2023 under Section 148, along with all subsequent proceedings. The parties were directed to revert to the stage of the reply to the notice under Section 148A(b), with the petitioner being given four weeks to file a response. The Assessing Officer was instructed to provide the necessary opportunity for the petitioner to upload the response on the designated portal and to pass an order in terms of Section 148A(d) thereafter. The writ petition was partly allowed, with no order as to costs.

---