SIAM STOCK HOLDINGS LIMITED vs. ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3(1)(2) & ORS.

PDF · subscribers
W.P.(C)/14580/2025HC DelhiDLHC01069890202519 September 2025Author: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that in the given facts, the proceedings initiated pursuant to the notice dated 17.03.2023 needed to be set aside and the matter remanded back to the Assessing Officer. The court found merit in the petitioner's submission that the notices were not received, and that the email address used by the revenue was that of an employee, not the company's registered email for current communications. This was considered a violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the court set aside the show-cause notice dated 17.03.2023, the order dated 17.04.2023 under section 148A(d), the reassessment notice dated 17.04.2023 under section 148, the ex-parte best judgment assessment order dated 13.05.2025 under sections 147/144, the notice of demand dated 13.05.2025 under section 156, and the penalty notices dated 13.05.2025. The petitioner was directed to file a reply to the notice dated 17.03.2023 within six weeks, and the AO was to proceed in accordance with law thereafter. All contentions of the petitioner on facts and law were left open to be canvassed before the AO. The court emphasized that this order was passed in the specific facts of the case.

What were the facts?

The petitioner, Siam Stock Holdings Limited, filed a writ petition challenging various notices and orders issued by the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle International Taxation 3(1)(2) and others, for Assessment Year 2019-20. The challenged actions include a show-cause notice under section 148A(b) dated 17.03.2023, an order under section 148A(d) dated 17.04.2023, a reassessment notice under section 148 dated 17.04.2023, an ex-parte best judgment assessment order under sections 147/144 dated 13.05.2025, consequential demand notice under section 156, and penalty notices under sections 271AAA, 271AAC(1) & 272A(1)(d) dated 13.05.2025, as well as an email communication dated 09.07.2025 regarding outstanding demand. The petitioner contended that it never received these notices/orders, with the first communication being an email on kcs@premjee.com in July 2025. The petitioner asserted that notices were sent to an employee's email (Veronique.magny.antoine@abaxservices.com) rather than the company's registered email.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO) are vitiated by a violation of the principles of natural justice due to non-receipt of notices and orders by the petitioner, specifically concerning the show-cause notice dated 17.03.2023 under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The petitioner argued that it did not receive any of the notices or orders issued by the revenue. The first communication received was an email in July 2025. The notices were allegedly sent to an employee's email address (Veronique.magny.antoine@abaxservices.com) and not to the petitioner's current registered email address (kcs@premjee.com), which has been used for all subsequent communications since Assessment Year 2016-17. This non-receipt constitutes a violation of natural justice, warranting the setting aside of the proceedings. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, stated that all notices were sent to Veronique.magny.antoine@abaxservices.com and not to kcs@premjee.com. They acknowledged the likelihood that the petitioner may not have accessed the notices/orders sent by them.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 148,Section 147,Section 144,Section 156,Section 271AAA,Section 271AAC(1),Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~48 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision : 19.09.2025 + W.P.(C) 14580/2025 CM APPL. 59830/2025 SIAM STOCK HOLDINGS LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Rohit Jain and Mr. Samarth Chaudhari, Advs. versus ASSISTANT/ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 3(1)(2) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Siddharth Sinha, SSC CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR V. 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 or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing: (a) show-cause notice dated 17.03.2023 issued by Respondent No.1 under section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (’the Act’); (b) order dated 17.04.2023 passed by Respondent No.1 under section 148A(d) of the Act with prior approval of Respondent No.2, (c) reassessment notice dated 17.04.2023 issued by Respondent No.1 under section 148 of the Act; (d) ex-parte best judgment assessment order dated 13.05.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 under sections 147/144 of the Act, along with consequential notice of demand dated 13.05.2025 issued under section 156 of the Act; (e) penalty notices [dated 13.05.2025] issued by Respondent No.1 under sections 271AAA, 271AAC(1) & 272A(1)(d) of the Act; (f) email communication dated 09.07.2025 of outstanding income tax demand(s) issued by Respondent No.3, in the case of the Petitioner for assessment year 2019-20, and all proceedings/ actions consequent thereto; (II) stay effect and operation of the impugned assessment order dated 13.05.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 under sections 147/144 of the Act and/ or any other proceedings/ actions initiated thereunder or in consequence thereto, including but not limited to recovery proceedings in pursuance of notice of demand under section 156 and/ or action in pursuance of penalty notices under sections 271AAA, 271AAC, & 272A(1)(d) of the Act, in the case of the petitioner for the assessment year 2019-20, 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 the petitioner. It is his submission that the first communication received by the petitioner was on kcs@premjee.com. in the month of July 2025 and as such the petitioner has filed the present petition. His submission is that none of the notices/orders were sent on kcs@premjee.com. Rather it appears that the notices and the orders were sent on Veronique.magny.antoine@abaxservices.com, which is not the email of assessee 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 Assessment Year 2016-17, but thereafter all the communications are being received by the respondent on kcs@premjee.com. Hence in that sense, there is a violation of the principles of the natural justice and the proceedings which have been initiated by issuing the first notice under Section148A(b) on 17.03.2023 needs to be set aside.

5.

Mr. Siddarth Sinha who appears for respondents on advance notice states as per his instructions all the notices were sent on the Veronique.magny.antoine@abaxservices.com and not on kcs@premjee.com. There may be a likelihood that the petitioner may not have accessed the notices/ 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 the proceedings initiated pursuant to notice dated 17.03.2023 need to be set aside and the matter be remanded back to the Assessing Officer.

7.

At this stage, Mr. Jain states on instructions that the petitioner shall file a reply to the notice dated 17.03.2023 within six weeks from today to enable the AO proceed in accordance with law.

8.

In view of the above, the proceedings initiated pursuant to notice dated 17.03.2023 being order dated 17.04.2023, reassessment notice dated 17.04.2023, ex-parte best judgment assessment order dated 13.05.2025, notice of demand dated 13.05.2025, penalty notice dated 13.05.2025 and email communication dated 09.07.2025 are set aside.

9.

The petitioner shall file its reply within six weeks from today and on receipt of the same, the AO shall proceed in accordance with law. All the contentions of the petitioners on facts and in law are left open to be canvassed 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. V. KAMESWAR RAO, J VINOD KUMAR, J SEPTEMBER 19, 2025 ss

More judgments on Section 148A(b)

All 524 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148A(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →