#notice service

The ITAT Nagpur set aside an appeal dismissal because the National Faceless Appeal Centre failed to serve notices to the assessee at the email address provided in Form 35, violating the fundamental right to a fair hearing. This ruling reinforces that technical compliance with notice procedures is not enough - service must be effective and aligned with the assessee’s official communications channel, impacting all taxpayers and revenue authorities under Section 250.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that any entry marking land as a 'private forest' in revenue records is legally void unless the state proves it served proper notice under Section 35(3) and issued a valid notification under Section 35(1). This protects bona fide land purchasers from hidden restrictions and forces forest authorities to follow due process before imposing forest status.

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that a proclamation under Section 82 CrPC is invalid if mandatory procedures-including proper service and public notice-are not strictly followed. The court emphasized that procedural lapses render the proclamation null and void, reinforcing due process protections for accused persons.

Telangana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission rules that ex parte orders under the Consumer Protection Act cannot be overturned merely on claims of non-receipt of notice without concrete proof. The petitioner was granted limited participation rights but barred from filing written submissions, reinforcing strict procedural compliance for setting aside ex parte orders.