The Madras High Court has remanded a case back to the Income Tax Department for fresh consideration after noting that an ex parte assessment order was passed without proper service of notice to the taxpayer.

The case centered around a dispute regarding the email address used for official communication. The petitioner, Natarajan Manohar, had challenged an assessment order dated May 1, 2024, issued under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

He argued that the order was passed ex parte without his knowledge, as no notices or communication had been served to his official email ID. According to him, his only registered email nm********@gmail.com had not received any notices from the department.

On the contrary, the Income Tax Department contended that the email ID of the petitioner’s auditor had been provided at the initial stage, and all communications had been duly sent to that address. The auditor, however, was said to be based in Dubai at the relevant time, raising doubts about whether the taxpayer had actually received the notices.

Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here

The contention of the income tax department was denied by the taxpayer stating that he has given only his mail id for the official communication.

The fact that the assessment order had been issued ex parte was undeniable, says Madras High Court Justice Krishnan Ramasamy. The Court determined that the petitioner’s assertion that he did not receive correspondence at his personal email account seemed sincere and merited review, given the case’s involvement with natural justice and tax responsibility issues.

As a result, but with several conditions, the Court revoked the contested assessment order. It ordered that within two weeks, the petitioner pay ₹10,000 to the Principal Government Naturopathy Medical College and Hospital. The matter would be remanded to the relevant assessing officer for a new decision after payment.

The Court further directed the petitioner to submit an additional reply with supporting documents within two weeks, after which the department must issue a clear seven-day notice granting a personal hearing. The assessing officer was also instructed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law after providing the petitioner a fair opportunity to be heard.