The taxpayer is not anticipated to keep the e-portal of the department open all the time to know about what the department is supposed to be doing, Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled.
The bench of Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Sudeepti Sharma noted that before any action is carried out, a communication of the notice should be as per the terms of the provisions as enumerated hereinabove. The provisions do not cite the communication being “presumed” by placing a notice on the e-portal.
A pragmatic perspective has to always be adopted in these cases. An individual or a company is not anticipated to maintain the e-portal of the department open all the time to know about what the department is presumed to be doing concerning the submission of forms, etc. In the income tax provisions, the principles of natural justice are inherent and it is needed to be necessarily complied with.
Before the petitioner/assessee a show cause notice was issued for initiating proceedings u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Commissioner of Income Tax Exemptions, Chandigarh, but the notice was not sent on the applicant’s email or otherwise and was just shown on the departments e-portal.
Concerning the show cause notice the two reminders were also published on the e-portal of the department. But, the same is an admitted position that the notice and reminders were not served to the applicant, since there is no email sent through them.
In the reply, the department proposed that communication of the notice electronically include communication of the notice by placing it on the e-portal.
The council argued that since the applicant has submitted his form on the e-portal, a presumption can be carried out that he knows about the notices and reminders that were placed on the e-portal since no need to personally submit the notice was there via e-mail or otherwise.
The court observed that the provisions of Section 282(1) of the Act of 1961 and Rule 127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 furnish for a method and manner of service of notice and orders.
The court, the applicant does not have provided enough chance to put up his petition concerning the proceedings u/s Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act of 1961 and that he was not provided with any notice. Hence he shall be qualified to furnish his response and the department shall be qualified to analyze that and pass a new order consequently.
While permitting the petition the court mentioned that the council shall furnish with the chance of hearing to the applicant and they shall indeed permit the applicant to appear personally for the objective to pass a speaking order independent of the order passed before through them dated 16th January 2023.
| Case Title | Munjal BCU Centre Of Innovation And Entrepreneurship, Ludhiana Versus Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemptions, Chandigarh |
| Citation | CWP-21028-2023 (O&M) |
| Date | 04.03.2024 |
| Counsel For Petitioner | Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate |
| Counsel For Respondent | Mr. Amanpreet (AP) Singh, Senior Standing Counsel |
| Punjab & Haranaya High Court | Read Order |
