Gujarat High Court
Krunalkumar Virambhai Desai vs The Assessment Unit, Income Tax ... on 16 October, 2025
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7268 of 2024
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
KRUNALKUMAR VIRAMBHAI DESAI
Versus
THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. TUSHAR HEMANI, SR. ADV. FOR MS VAIBHAVI K PARIKH(3238) for
the Petitioner(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI D MEHTA(3206) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 16/10/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI)
1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. Tushar Hemani for learned advocate Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondent.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Senior Page 1 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent.
3. Considering the controversy arising in this petition which is in narrow compass, with the consent of the learned advocates for the respective parties, the petition is taken up for hearing today.
4. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the Assessment Order dated 21.3.2024 passed by the respondent under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 as well as the demand notice under Section 156 of the Act dated 21.3.2024.
5. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are as under: Page 2 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined 5.1 The petitioner is an individual and had filed return of income under the provisions of the Act on 31.10.2018 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. It is the case of the petitioner that he had specified "[email protected]" as well as "[email protected]" as the prescribed email IDs of the petitioner.
5.2 It is the case of the petitioner that a notice came to be issued by respondent under Section 148A(b) of the Act on 16.3.2022 which was sent to the petitioner on registered email IDs.
Response to the notice under Section 148A(b) was furnished by the petitioner on 22.3.2023. After taking note of reply dated 22.3.2022, the respondent passed an order under Section 148A(d) of the Act on 1.4.2023 and issued notice under Section 148 of the Act on 1.4.2023, which were also communicated through registered email IDs of the petitioner. The petitioner filed return of income in response to notice under Section 148 of Page 3 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined the Act on 14.4.2022.
5.3 It is the case of the petitioner that a notice under Section 142(1) of the Act dated 6.12.2022 was issued by the respondent on the registered email ID of the petitioner. Response was furnished to the said notice on 19.12.2022. The respondent issued another notice on 9.1.2023 under Section 142(1) of the Act on the registered email ID of the petitioner. Another notice dated 18.1.2023 under Section 142(1) of the Act was sent to the petitioner on the registered email ID. Response was furnished by the petitioner on 21.1.2023. The respondent issued another notice dated 22.6.2023 on the registered email ID of the petitioner. The petitioner furnished response on 23.6.2023.
5.6 It is the case of the petitioner that subsequent to his response on 23.6.2023, nothing was heard from the side of the respondent for a Page 4 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined considerable period of time. Suddenly another notice under Section 142(1) was issued on 21.2.2024. However, the notice was sent on "[email protected]" instead of the registered email IDs of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that, therefore, the petitioner was never served with the notice dated 21.2.2024 and the notice remained unanswered. It is the case of the petitioner that another notice dated 12.3.2024 was not sent on the registered email ID of the petitioner and, therefore, the notice remained unanswered. It is in this fact that the petitioner did not respond to the notice dated 12.3.2024, which resulted into passing of the impugned Assessment Order dated 21.3.2024 under the provisions of Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act. Consequently, the impugned demand notice to the tune of Rs.5,07,10,018/- was given under the provisions of Section 156 of the Act.
Page 5 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined
6. Learned Senior Counsel Mr. Tushar Hemani for the petitioner submitted that the impugned Assessment Order for the Assessment Year 2018-19 has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The earlier notices were sent on the registered email IDs of the petitioner. However, the last notices were not sent on the registered email IDs of the petitioner but were sent to the third party, which has resulted into passing of the impugned Assessment Order as well as impugned demand notice. Therefore, this is a clear case of violation of principles of natural justice. It was further submitted by learned Senior Counsel Mr. Tushar Hemani that it is a trite law that no adverse order must be passed against any person unless such person is afforded reasonable opportunity of being heard.
7. Per contra, learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Maithili Mehta for the respondent could not Page 6 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined controvert the submissions made by learned Senior Counsel Mr. Tushar Hemani. Ms. Mehta also could not controvert the fact that the notice dated 12.3.2024 was not received on the registered email IDs of the petitioner. In wake of such factual aspects, Ms. Mehta has requested this Court to pass appropriate order.
8. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and having perused the material on record, certain facts are not in dispute. It is not in dispute that the notices dated 21.2.2024 and 12.3.2024 were not sent to the registered email IDs of the petitioner i.e. [email protected] as well as [email protected]. This factual aspect and controversy is not disputed by the learned Senior Standing Counsel Ms. Mehta. It is fundamental proposition of law that the other side should be heard before any order is passed. The maxim of Audi Alteram Partem is broad enough to include Page 7 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined the rule against bias since a fair hearing is must for it to be a unbiased hearing. The essential ingredients of fair hearing is that a person should be served with a proper notice. That the person has a right of a proper notice.
9. In the instant case, it is not disputed that notices under Section 142(1) of the Act, dated 21.2.2024 and 12.3.2024, were sent on wrong email ID, therefore, the petitioner was not in a position to controvert the same. In view of the same, the impugned Assessment Order passed by the respondent in case of the petitioner dated 21.3.2024 under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 is not tenable and is required to be quashed and set-aside and is, accordingly, quashed and set- aside and consequently, the demand notice under Section 156 of the Act dated 21.3.2024 is also required to be quashed and set-aside and the matter is remanded to respondent-Assessing Page 8 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/7268/2024 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/10/2025 undefined Officer to pass a fresh de-nova order, in accordance with law after considering the reply of the petitioner as well as to provide opportunity of hearing, if desired by the petitioner. Such exercise shall be completed within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.
The petition is disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No order as to costs.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) (PRANAV TRIVEDI,J) SAJ GEORGE Page 9 of 9 Uploaded by SAJ GEORGE(HC01069) on Thu Oct 16 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 17 03:26:36 IST 2025