Notice u/s 148 sent to some incorrect e-mail ID held as non-est and bad in law. ITAT quashed re-assessment order.
In a recent judgment, ITAT Delhi held that notice u/s 148 sent to some incorrect e-mail ID was non-est and bad in law. ITAT quashed re-assessment order.
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
4453 (2025) (03) abcaus.in ITAT
In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in upholding the reassessment proceedings.
The case of the appellant assessee was that the jurisdictional notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was never served upon him in compliance of sec 282A rwr 127 of I.T. rules 1962 and therefore, such proceedings without service of notice u/s 148 was invalid in law and void-ab-initio.
The appellant contended that service of the notice u/s 148 of the Act is a mandatory requirement for valid reopening of assessment. He challenged the validity of the impugned assessment order on the ground that no notice u/s 148 of the Act was ever served on him.
The Tribunal observed that record showed that the notice purportedly issued u/s 148 of the Act was never communicated to the assessee in the correct e-mail ID available on the records of the Department but to some unknown e-mail ID. The fact of the service of notice u/s 148 on the wrong email id was supported by the screenshot of efilling portal and the ITBA system screenshot provided to the assessee by the department in response to RTI application.
The Tribunal observed that these two evidences distinctly showed that the notice u/s 148 had been sent through the electronic mode on the unknown email id and not on the appellant’s email id. The latest email id of the assessee had been on record of the department was a fact evident from the screenshot which was the communication of processing intimation u/s 143(1) sent on correct email id, which event was just 4 months prior to issue of notice u/s 148.
Further, the Tribunal observed that the latest email id was duly mentioned in last ITR available with AO which was about 2 months prior to issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act. Notice was even not sent to the old email id of the assessee as mentioned the ITR originally filed for relevant Assessment Year u/s 139(1).
The Tribunal opined that the service of the notice was therefore not in accordance with section 282 read with rule 127 of IT rules.
The Tribunal further observed that there was no communication of the notice either through physically or through post/courier and only mode of communication adopted by the department in present case is electronic communication that too on the email id not pertaining to the appellant at relevant point of time. The appellant came to be aware of the ongoing reassessment proceedings for the first time when the notice issued u/s 142(1) was sent to him on correct email id.
The Tribunal further observed that Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that when the notices were sent to unrelated e-mail address, the date on which such notice was first viewed by the assessee on e-filing portal should be construed as the date of issuance of notice. In the instant case, there was no rebuttal on facts from the Revenue that notice was served on the correct e-mail ID or communicated physically or through the modes prescribed under s. 282 of the Act.
Accordingly, the Tribunal held that impugned re-assessment order framed in consequence of notice issued under section 148 which was never served was no-nest and bad in law.
Download Full Judgment Click Here >>
- Fraud & deception not trade and business and money accumulated is proceeds of crime
- ICAI extends last date to submit MEF for FY 2025-26 to 10th October, 2025
- ICAI defers Guidance Note on Financial Statements of Non-Corporate entities/LLPs
- Delhi Govt. to help persons with benchmark disabilities with high support need
- Placing Genset in steel container fitted with additional parts amounts to manufacture
