Pursuant to a scheme of amalgamation, a company was merged with assessee company and registered office of assessee was shifted to new address. Assessee appeared to have intimated change in address to Income-tax department and several communications were also sent to assessee to its new e-mail id and new address of its registered office.Since revised return had old address, impugned assessment order was passed on an old address whereby certain additions were made.On writ the coury held that there was no doubt that there was a mistake committed by assessee that while filing revised return instead of giving new address and new e-mail id, assessee had given old postal address and old e-mail id. However, fact also remained that other wings of department were aware of shifting of address of assessee-Similarly, they were also aware of change in e-mail id-.While passing order of refund claim for subsequent financial year i.e., 2019-20, notices\/orders were sent to correct address.Court held that\u00a0\u00a0 assessee had not committed a serious mistake in not providing correct address and e-mail address while filing return although it had turned out to be fatal to assessee and considering interest of parties,\u00a0 assessment order was e quashed and case was to be remanded back to Assessing Officer with a direction to pass a speaking order. (AY. 2018-19)(SJ)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
S. 143(3): Assessment-Service of notice-Change of address-Notices sent to old address provided by assessee in revised return-Department aware of new address while passing order of refund for subsequent assessment year Mistake due to adoption of mode of communication electronically-Assessment order quashed-Matter remanded with direction to pass speaking order within 45 days [S.69, 282, Rule 127] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-60279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-fGf","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60279","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=60279"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60279\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":60280,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60279\/revisions\/60280"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60279"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60279"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60279"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}