In the case of M/s Salim Associates Builders & Developers Pvt Ltd vs Commercial Tax Officer, the High Court of Kerala observed that sending application for revision of returns under the Kerala Value Added Tax (KVAT) Act through E-mail is not a proper manner.
In the present case assessee is a contractor has duly filed its quarterly returns for the assessment year and declared a nil taxable turnover and the same effect shown in the annual return also.
During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) found mistakes in the returns filed by the assessee and accordingly notice was issued by him.
Before the court the assessee contended that even prior to the issuance of the notice had requested for revision of returns and had send application to the AO through E-mail.
While perusing the material facts on records the High Court Judge K.Vinod Chandran refused to accept the assessee’s contention and clarified that the application of revision of return sending through E-mail cannot be considered as a proper manner. Moreover, the assessee has failed to submit a hard copy of the same before the Court.
The Court further observed that sending of application through E-mail cannot be considered as a proper way of communication, because it cannot be expected that the AO would regularly open his e-mail and would be thus notified of assessee’s application. The application of the assessee may be received and remaining in the mail box and the Assessing officer would not have opened it and in such circumstances an application for revision which was sent by e-mail, would not be acceptable, hence no revision is allowable to the assessee.
“In many cases, when the Assessing Officers issue notices by e-mail alone, this Court has held that the same is not proper, especially since it cannot be expected that an assessee would regularly open his e-mail and would be thus notified of the pre-assessment notice. The same logic applies when the assessee forwards an e-mail to the Assessing Officer; which is without due acknowledgment of the communication,” the Court said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
