The Question Whether There Was Proper Income Tax Notice Or Not Cannot Be Examined In Writ Proceedings: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that the question as to whether there was a proper income tax notice served or not is a disputed fact that cannot be go into in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The Court was considering an intra-court Appeal with question as to whether the order of the assessment under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax was open to challenge for violation of the principles of natural justice.
The division-bench of Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Easwaran S. observed, "On consideration of the rival submissions raised across the bar, we are of the view that there is no merit in the contentions raised by the writ appellant. As rightly observed by the learned Single Judge, the question as to whether there was a proper notice or not is certainly a disputed question of fact, which cannot be gone into in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India."
The Appellant was represented by Advocate Premjit Nagendran while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Christopher Abraham.
Facts of the Case
The Petitioner was informed by the Income Tax Authorities regarding the tax-arrears against her for the assessment year 2017-18 through a written communication referring to an assessment order, which is alleged to have been served through e-mail. The Petitioner further contended that on logging onto the web portal of the Income Tax Department, the Petitioner came to know that the order of assessment was passed. It was asserted that the Petitioner was not served with any communication regarding the draft assessment order. Therefore, complaining that the completion of assessment is against the provisions of Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.
On the other hand, the Respondent produced the copy of the profile administration, it was further contended that Notice under Section 148 was issued electronically and delivered to the registered e-mail id and an SMS alert was triggered by the system. It was pointed out that copies of the Notices issued through speed post and the postal track record were also produced to evidence the service of notice.
Reasoning By Court
The Court agreed with the findings of the single-judge that the question as to whether there was a proper income tax notice served or not is a disputed fact that cannot be go into in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
The Appeal was accordingly rejected.
Cause Title: Annjaly Sandeep Shetty vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (2025:KER:13939)
Appearances:
Appellant- Advocate Premjit Nagendran, Advocate P. Raghunathan, Advocate Rishal K
Respondent- Advocate Christopher Abraham, Advocate P.R. Ajith Kumar, Advocate Jose Joseph
Click here to read/ download Order
