Case Details: Srimani Basu v. Income-tax Officer - [2025] 171 taxmann.com 548 (Bombay)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- M. S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.
-
Tejveer Singh for the Petitioner.
-
Suresh Kumar for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The Assessing Officer (AO) issued a notice to the assessee under section 148A(b) and subsequently passed an order under section 148A(d). Consequent to such an order, he issued a notice under section 148.
In the writ petition, the assessee contended that the notices were not served to her either on the email ID or by post. Therefore, the proceedings were bad in law.
High Court Held
The Bombay High Court held that it was the duty of the assessee to inform the Income-tax Department about the change of her address and make necessary changes in the PAN card details. As the assessee failed to do so, no fault could be attributed to the AO on account of non-service of the notices.
However, considering that the assessee was an individual lady and her husband was on a transferable job, the AO was directed to serve subsequent notices on the address and e-mail ID given by the assessee.
The post No Fault of Revenue if Notice Wasn’t Served Upon Assessee Due to Non-Updation of Her Address in PAN Card | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.