High Court · 2025

W.P.No. 11950 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 04.04.2025CoramThe Honourable Mr.Justice Krishnan RamasamyW.P.No. 11950 of 2025 andW.M.P.Nos.13508, 13509 & 13510 of 2025 Pennagaram Kuppusamy Pounraj ...Petitioner Vs.1. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, rep. by Income Tax Officer, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Income Tax Officer, 45F7+ RMP, Dharmapuri, T.N. 636 701.3. ICICI Bank Ltd., rep. By its Branch Manager, No.74, Nethaji Bye Pass Road, Dharmapuri, T.N. 636 701. 4. South Indian Bank Ltd., rep. by its Branch Manager, DRV Annexe, 64 Nethaji By-pass Rod, Dharmapuri, T.N. - 636 701.5. HDFC Bank, rep. by its Branch Manager, Salem Main Road, Bharathipuram, Dharmapuri T.N. 636 705. ...Respondents Prayer 1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 2025Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for entire records of the proceedings in the impugned assessment order dated 26.12.2024, bearing DIN No.ITBA/AST/S/144/2024-25/1071574955(1) for the assessment years 2023-2024 issued by the first respondent and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the third respondent to de-freeze the petitioner's bank accounts. For Petitioner : Mr.Kishore Balasubramanian For Respondents 1 & 2 : Dr.B.Ramaswamy, Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent-5 : Mr.C.Mohan and Ms.A.Rexy Josephine for M/s.King and Partridge Order Heard Mr.Kishore Balasubramanian learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Dr.B.Ramaswamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel, who take notice for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.C.Mohan and Ms.A.Rexy Josephine, learned counsel, who takes notice on behalf of the respondent No.5. With consent, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order passed by the 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 2025first respondent dated 26.12.2024 for the assessment year 2023-2024 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the third respondent to de-freeze the petitioner's bank accounts. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not been issued with any notice in person and the notice was sent only through e-mail, that too, not to the current e-mail address, ''[email protected], but to the former e-mail ID, ''''[email protected]/[email protected]) '' and the petitioner, who was ignorant of such notice being issued to their former e-mail ID, failed to respond to the notices sent by the respondent-Income Tax Department, but, the first respondent, without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, proceeded to pass the assessment order. 3.1 Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that the impugned orders suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be aside,4. Dr.B.Ramaswamy, the learned Senior Standing Counsel (T) for 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 2025the respondent-Income Tax Department strongly raised objection to the contention putforth by the learned counsel for the petitioner by contending that apart from uploading the notice through Portal, the petitioner was also issued with a notice through e-mail, therefore, the petitioner cannot have a say that no notice has been issued. Further, it is contended that the petitioner also cannot plead ignorance of the notices sent by the respondent-Department under the guise that notice was not sent to them to the present e-mail ID, viz., ''''[email protected], when admittedly, the petitioner's primary e-mail ID remains to be the same, viz., '''[email protected]/[email protected]) however, he fairly submits that, in the event, this Court is inclined to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to putforth their defence, by remanding the matter back to the Authority concerned, the same may be done, subject to certain terms. 5. I have given due considerations to the submissions made by the rival parties and perused the materials available on record. 6. The petitioner is an assessee on the files of the respondent-4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 2025Income Tax Department.. The petitioner, till FY 2015-16 has been filing tax returns regularly with the help of the Chartered Accountant through the petitioner's Firm registered e-mail ID, bearing address as follows ''[email protected]/[email protected]). Thereafter, the said Auditor resigned in the year 2016, and during the period between FY 2016-17 and 2021-22, since the petitioner did not have any taxable income, did not file returns during the aforesaid period, however, from 2022-23 onwards, again, the petitioner has been filing returns with the current Auditor, S.Prahalad. 6.1 Thus, it is the contention of the petitioner that for the subject FY 2022-23/AY 2023-24, the petitioner filed return of income on 20.06.2023, declaring a total income of Rs.6,58,650/-. In the said returns, the petitioner's primary e-mail ID was mentioned as ''[email protected]. In fact, the said return of income was processed on 13.11.2023 and refund was issued, and an intimation regarding filing of returns was also intimated through the aforesaid e-mail address, therefore, the respondent-Department ought to have sent all the notices/communications, which culminated in the impugned order to the present e-mail id, however, since the same were sent 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 2025to the former e-mail id and not to the present e-mail ID, the petitioner, who was ignorant of such notices, failed to file reply and give appropriate response. Only when the petitioner's bank account was frozen, the petitioner, upon verification from the bank Officials, viz., respondents 3 to 5 came to know of the impugned proceedings, and aggrieved against the said impugned proceedings, the present Writ Petition is filed. 6.2 Per contra, it is the contention of the learned Senior Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2 that notice was sent to the primary e-mail id, therefore, the petitioner cannot plead ignorance of the same. 6. 3. However, this Court, while sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot act as a Fact-finding Authority and delve into such disputed questions of fact and examine the veracity of the statements made by the rival parties, when the fact remains that the petitioner has neither filed reply nor participated in the proceedings before passing the impugned assessment order, the order can only be deemed to be an exparte, as the same suffers from violation of principles of natural justice. 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 20256.4 Therefore, this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the petitioner to file reply and participate in the proceedings by setting aside the impugned assessment order, however, subject to certain proviso. 6.5 Accordingly, this Court is inclined to pass/issue the following order/direction:-i) The impugned assessment order dated 26.12.2024 is set aside. ii)The matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration, however, the same is subject to the condition that the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.20,00,000/-(Rupees Twenty Lakhs only) to the respondent-Department within a period of five weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, apart from making a payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs to the Principal Government Naturopathy Medical College and Hospital, bearing Account No.7883022723, IFSC Code: IDIB000M157 within the said period. 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 2025iii) Upon production of proof with regard to the payments made by the petitioner, the first respondent is directed to open the Portal, so as to enable the petitioner to file his reply. iv) Thereafter, the petitioner is directed to file reply within a period of four weeks therefrom, by treating the assessment order as a show cause notice. v) Thereupon, the first respondent is directed to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner by issuing a clear 14 days notice and thereafter, shall hear the petitioner in full and decide the matter in accordance with law.vi) So far as the attachment of the petitioner's bank account is concerned, once the impugned order is set aside, any recovery proceedings initiated based on such impugned proceedings has to be necessarily given a go-by, therefore, the second respondent, is directed to take appropriate steps towards de-freezure of the petitioner's bank account by issuing directions to the bank officials, viz., respondents 3 to 5, based on which, the bank officials shall permit the petitioner to operate the same, without any hassle. 8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 20257. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed on the aforesaid terms. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 04.04.2025sdIndex : yes/noNeutral Citation : yes/noTo1. The Assessment Unit, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Income Tax Department, rep. by Income Tax Officer, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Income Tax Officer, 45F7+ RMP, Dharmapuri, T.N. 636 701.3. ICICI Bank Ltd., rep. By its Branch Manager, No.74, Nethaji Bye Pass Road, Dharmapuri, T.N. 636 701. 4. South Indian Bank Ltd., rep. by its Branch Manager, DRV Annexe, 64 Nethaji By-pass Rod, Dharmapuri, T.N. - 636 701.5. HDFC Bank, rep. by its Branch Manager, Salem Main Road, Bharathipuram, Dharmapuri T.N. 636 705 Krishnan Ramasamy,J.,sd9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No. 11950 of 2025W.P.No. 11950 of 2025 04.04.202510/10