PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI versus M/S I-VEN INTERACTIVE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Citation: [2019] 13 S.C.R. 509 · Decided: 18-10-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: UDAY UMESH LALIT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
509
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI
v.
M/S I-VEN INTERACTIVE LIMITED, MUMBAI
(Civil Appeal No. 8132 of 2019)
OCTOBER 18, 2019
[UDAY UMESH LALIT, INDIRA BANERJEE AND
M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Income Tax Act, 1961 – s.142(1), Proviso to s.143(2) –
Respondent-assessee company filed return of income for 2006-07,
declaring total income of Rs.3,38,71,716/-, under E-Module Scheme
– Notice u/s.143(2) issued to the assessee on 05.10.07 at the address
available as per the PAN database –Another notice issued u/s.143(2)
– Further notices u/s.142(1) issued to the assessee – Duly served –
Notices challenged on the ground that they were not served upon
the assessee as it never received them and the subsequent notices
served and received were beyond the period of limitation prescribed
under proviso to s.143– Assessing Officer made disallowance of
Rs.8,91,17,643/- and computed total income at Rs.5,52,45,930/- –
Assessment order confirmed by the CIT (Appeals), Income Tax
Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) and the High Court – Held: Mere
mentioning of the new address in the return of income without
specifically intimating the Assessing Officer with respect to change
of address and without getting the PAN database changed, is not
sufficient – In absence of such specific intimation, Assessing Officer
would be justified in sending the notice at the available address
mentioned in the PAN database, more particularly when the return
has been filed under E-Module scheme– Notices u/s.143(2) are
issued on selection of case generated under automated system of
the Department which picks up the address of the assessee from the
database of the PAN – Therefore, change of address in the database
of PAN is must, in case of change in the name of the company and/
or any change in the registered office or the corporate office and
the same has to be intimated to the Registrar of Companies in the
prescribed format –Thereafter the assessee is required to approach
the Department with the copy of the said document and make an
   [2019] 13 S.C.R. 509
509
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
510
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 13 S.C.R.
application for change of address in the departmental database of
PAN, which in the present case the assessee failed to do – Assessing
Officer cannot be said to have committed any error and was justified
in sending the notice at the address as per the PAN database –
Thus, the notice dtd. 05.10.07 can be said to be within the period
prescribed in proviso to s.143(2) – Once the notice is sent within
the period prescribed in the proviso to s.143(2), in that case, actual
service of the notice upon the assessee thereafter would be
immaterial – Judgment of the High Court, CIT (Appeals) and the
ITAT holding the assessment order bad in law, quashed – Matter
remanded to the CIT (Appeals) to consider the appeal on merits, in
accordance with law.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Notice under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax
Act, 1961 was sent by the Assessing Officer to the assessee at
the address as mentioned in the PAN database on 05.10.2007
and the same was within the time limit prescribed in proviso to
Section 143(2) of the 1961 Act. It was the case on behalf of the
assessee that vide communication dated 06.12.2005 the assessee
intimated to the Assessing Officer about the new address and
despite the same the Assessing Officer sent the notice at the old
address. The assessee has failed to prove the alleged
communication dated 06.12.2005. The only document available
is Form No.18 filed with the ROC.  Filing of Form-18 with the
ROC cannot be said to be an intimation to the Assessing Officer
with respect to intimation of change in address. No application
was made by the assessee to change the address in the PAN data
base and in the PAN database the old address continued.
Therefore, in absence of any intimation to the Assessing Officer
with respect to change in address, the Assessing Officer was
justified in issuing the notice at the address available as per the
PAN database.  Therefore, the Assessing Officer cannot be said
to have committed any error and in fact the Assessing Officer
was justified in sending the notice at the address as per the PAN
database.  If that is so, the notice dated 05.10.2007 can be said to
be within the period prescribed in proviso to Section 143(2) of
the 1961 Act.  Once the notice is issued within the period
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
511
prescribed as per the proviso to Section 143(2) of the Act, the
same can be said to be su
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.