Notice can be served on POA holder Chartered Accountant as agent of assessee – Supreme Court

Notice can be served on Chartered Accountant as agent of assessee when CA holds Power of Attorney of the Company for the relevant AY – Supreme Court

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 3178 (2019) (10) SC

Important case law relied upon by the parties:
State of Rajasthan v. Basant Nehata 2005 (12) SCC 77

Notice can be served on POA holder Chartered Accountant as agent 

In The instant case, the assessee company had filed an application for re­calling of the Judgment passed ex-parte by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the ground that the applicant company was not served with the notice of the SLP at the registered office, nor copy of the SLP was served.

The company submitted that the Supreme Court Notices were sent to the earlier registered office address of the company whereas the company had changed its registered office two times thereafter.

According to the applicant company, it learnt of the Judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court from a news clipping published in the newspaper.

According to the applicant, the dasti notice was served by the Income Tax Department on the Chartered Accountant (CA) of the company who on affidavit deposed that he was the  authorized representative of the company before the Income Tax Authorities only but  was not engaged  before the High Court, or the Supreme Court. 

The CA further submitted that the notice was served on him by the Income Tax Inspector but he bona fide believed that the documents were some Income Tax Return documents from Income Tax Department.

The applicant company also argued that the said Chartered Accountant was not the “principal officer” of the Applicant – Company, and hence service could not have been effected upon him. 

The Income Tax Department in the Counter Affidavit submitted that the dasti notice was duly served on the chartered accountant at his office address, in his capacity as the authorized representative of the company, who was holding a Power of Attorney of the company for the relevant Assessment Year.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court opined that the CA admittedly being the Power of Attorney holder  of the applicant company for the relevant A.Y., was the agent of the company within the meaning of section 2(35) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act), and  hence  Notice  could  be  served  on  him as the agent of the assessee – Company in this case.

Accordingly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the application for Re­call.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• Penalty u/s 271B for unfilled column 40 in Tax Audit Report Form 3CD deleted by ITAT
• Merely ex-parte rectifying computation without amending assessment order not make it nullity- ITAT
• Once assessee discharges primary onus, it shifts to AO to bring evidence to contrary – ITAT
• Cost Inflation Index for FY/Tax Year 2026-27 notified by CBDT. See Up-to-date Table of CII
• Power of CIT(A) u/s 251(1)(a) to remand case can be exercised only in best judgment assessment