+W.p.(C) v. Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner Of Income Taxcircle International Taxation 3(1)(2) & Ors

$~48*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 19.09.2025 +W.P.(C) 14580/2025 CM APPL. 59830/2025SIAM STOCK HOLDINGS LIMITED .....Petitioner Through:Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. SamarthChaudhari, Advs.Chaudhari, Advs. versus ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXCIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3(1)(2) & ORS. .....Respondents Through:Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAOHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMARV. KAMESWAR RAO , J. (ORAL) CM APPL. 59831/2025 1.Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.The application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 14580/2025 and CM APPL. 59830/2025 3.This petition has been filed with the following prayers :“(I) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari/ mandamus orany other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing:(a)show-causenoticedated17.03.2023issuedbyRespondent No.1 under section 148A(b) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (’the Act’);(b) order dated 17.04.2023 passed by Respondent No.1under section 148A(d) of the Act with prior approval ofRespondent No.2,“(I) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari/ mandamus orany other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing:(a)show-causenoticedated17.03.2023issuedbyRespondent No.1 under section 148A(b) of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (’the Act’);(b) order dated 17.04.2023 passed by Respondent No.1under section 148A(d) of the Act with prior approval ofRespondent No.2, (c) reassessment notice dated 17.04.2023 issued byRespondent No.1 under section 148 of the Act; (d) ex-parte best judgment assessment order dated13.05.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 under sections147/144 of the Act, along with consequential notice ofdemand dated 13.05.2025 issued under section 156 of theAct; (e)penaltynotices[dated13.05.2025]issuedbyRespondent No.1 under sections 271AAA, 271AAC(1) &272A(1)(d) of the Act; (f) email communication dated 09.07.2025 of outstandingincome tax demand(s) issued by Respondent No.3, in thecase of the Petitioner for assessment year 2019-20, and all proceedings/ actions consequent thereto;(II) stay effect and operation of the impugned assessment orderdated 13.05.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 under sections147/144 of the Act and/ or any other proceedings/ actionsinitiated thereunder or in consequence thereto, including butnot limited to recovery proceedings in pursuance of notice ofdemand under section 156 and/ or action in pursuance ofpenalty notices under sections 271AAA, 271AAC, & 272A(1)(d)of the Act, in the case of the petitioner for the assessment year2019-20, during pendency of the present petition; (III) grant ad-interim ex-parte relief in terms of prayer (II)above; (IV) call for the records of the case from the Respondents;” 4.The submission of Mr. Rohit Jain, learned counsel for petitioner,primarily is that none of the notices/orders have been received by thepetitioner. It is his submission that the first communication received by thepetitioner was on . in the month of July 2025 and as suchthe petitioner has filed the present petition. His submission is that none ofthe notices/orders were sent on . Rather it appears that , which is not the email ofassessee company rather of an employee. In any case, the last income tax return filed by the assessee company on that e-mail was for the AssessmentYear 2016-17, but thereafter all the communications are being received bythe respondent on . Hence in that sense, there is aviolation of the principles of the natural justice and the proceedings whichhave been initiated by issuing the first notice under Section148A(b) on17.03.2023 needs to be set aside. 5.Mr. Siddarth Sinha who appears for respondents on advance and not on may be a likelihood that the petitioner may not have accessed thenotices/ orders which have been sent by the respondents. return filed by the assessee company on that e-mail was for the AssessmentYear 2016-17, but thereafter all the communications are being received bythe respondent on . Hence in that sense, there is aviolation of the principles of the natural justice and the proceedings whichhave been initiated by issuing the first notice under Section148A(b) on17.03.2023 needs to be set aside. 5.Mr. Siddarth Sinha who appears for respondents on advance and not on may be a likelihood that the petitioner may not have accessed thenotices/ orders which have been sent by the respondents. 6.If that be so, in the facts of this case, we are of the view that theproceedings initiated pursuant to notice dated 17.03.2023 need to be setaside and the matter be remanded back to the Assessing Officer. 7.At this stage, Mr. Jain states on instructions that the petitioner shallfile a reply to the notice dated 17.03.2023 within six weeks from today toenable the AO proceed in accordance with law. 8.In view of the above, the proceedings initiated pursuant to noticedated 17.03.2023 being order dated 17.04.2023, reassessment notice dated17.04.2023, ex-parte best judgment assessment order dated 13.05.2025,notice of demand dated 13.05.2025, penalty notice dated 13.05.2025 andemail communication dated 09.07.2025 are set aside. 9.The petitioner shall file its reply within six weeks from today and onreceipt of the same, the AO shall proceed in accordance with law. All thecontentions of the petitioners on facts and in law are left open to becanvassed before the AO. 10.It is made clear that this order has been passed in the facts of this case.11.The petition disposed of.11.The petition disposed of. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J SEPTEMBER 19, 2025ss VINOD KUMAR, J