The Kerala High Court dismissed the writ petition after determining that the petitioner’s stand was not valid. The petitioner utilized multiple email IDs for submitting Income Tax Returns ( ITR ) and appeals, alleging that the appellate authority did not provide a hearing opportunity and neglected to communicate the order to the petitioner.
The petitioner, an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, filed a writ petition challenging assessment orders for the years 2011-12 to 2014-15. Alleging a lack of opportunity for a hearing and non-receipt of communication from the appellate authority, the petitioner sought redress.
In response to court directives, the respondents stated that the petitioner provided five email IDs, including “middleeast132@gmail.com,” for communication. Notices were sent to both “middleeast132@gmail.com” and “shamafcetmr@yahoo.com,” the latter being the latest email provided in the return for the latest assessment year. The petitioner responded to a notice sent to “middleeast132@gmail.com” for the assessment year 2017-18.
However, the petitioner’s counsel argued that communication was not sent to “jayson@sajuandco.com,” provided in the returns, and that “middleeast132@gmail.com” was only used for the 2017-18 appeal, which is pending.
Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh, while rendering judgment, noted that that when the petitioner himself has given multiple email ids and petitioner has responded to the notice issued on e-mail id ‘middleeast132@gmail.com’ on which the several communications for hearing of the appeal were issued and the bench found that the stand of the petitioner is not tenable and, therefore, the writ petition was dismissed.
Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, suggesting recourse to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for further appeal if desired.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
