Writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings dismissed as Revenue properly served Section 148A(b) notice at admitted address

Delhi HC dismissed the writ petition challenging reassessment proceedings. The petitioner argued that notice u/s 148A(b) should have been served via registered email, claiming violation of natural justice. The court held that the Revenue substantially fulfilled statutory requirements by serving notice at the petitioner's admitted address, supported by delivery reports. The court found no mandate requiring email service under Section 148A(b) and noted the petitioner had alternative remedies available. The challenge was deemed frivolous and the reassessment order was upheld.

---

---

Issues involved:

1. Validity of the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Service of the show cause notice u/s 148A(b) to the petitioner.
3. Compliance with the principles of natural justice.

Summary:

1. Validity of the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

The petitioner challenged the order dated 27 March 2023 passed by the Revenue u/s 148A(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the consequential initiation of assessment proceedings for AY 2016-17. The petitioner argued that the show cause notice u/s 148A(b) was not served, thus violating the principles of natural justice.

2. Service of the show cause notice u/s 148A(b) to the petitioner:

The petitioner contended that the notice u/s 148A(b) was not served, preventing them from filing a reply. The Revenue, however, provided evidence showing that the notice was sent via speed post and delivered to the petitioner's address on 17 March 2023. The Revenue also submitted proof of delivery and a tracking report, which was not contested by the petitioner.

3. Compliance with the principles of natural justice:

The Court held that the mandate of Section 148A(b) is to provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The Court found that the Revenue had substantially fulfilled this requirement by serving the notice at the petitioner's address. The Court noted that the principles of natural justice were not violated as the petitioner was given a fair opportunity to respond. The Court further observed that the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy to challenge the assessment order passed on 14 January 2024.

Conclusion:

The Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the statutory requirements were met and the principles of natural justice were upheld. The petitioner was advised to take appropriate legal recourse against the assessment order if so desired.

---