The Dangerous Habit of Ignoring Income Tax Emails and SMS – And How It Quietly Backfires
One of the most common statements taxpayers make these days is: “Sir, I received some email from Income Tax, but I thought it was spam.” Unfortunately, the Income Tax Department does not treat ignored emails as spam. It treats them as silence. And in tax law, silence can be expensive. In the faceless and digital tax regime, emails and SMS have effectively replaced the old brown envelopes and personal visits of tax inspectors. Notices now arrive quietly, politely, and invisibly-often landing in the “Promotions” or “Spam” folder. Ignoring them does not make them disappear; it only makes the problem grow.
The first dangerous misconception is that “if something serious happens, the department will call me.” That era is long gone. Today, communication from the Income Tax Department is largely electronic. If an email is issued on the e-filing portal and an alert SMS is sent, the law presumes that the taxpayer has been duly served, whether or not the email was actually opened.
Many taxpayers believe that only a physical notice has legal validity. This belief is outdated. Notices issued electronically under the Income-tax Act are legally valid. Courts have consistently held that once a notice is uploaded on the portal and intimation is sent, responsibility shifts to the taxpayer to respond. Claiming ignorance later rarely helps.
The most ignored communication is the intimation under section 143(1). Taxpayers often assume it is merely an “acknowledgment.” In reality, it is a mini-assessment. Adjustments may be made for mismatches in TDS, incorrect deductions, or computational errors. If such intimation is ignored, the demand becomes final. Interest starts running, refunds get adjusted, and recovery proceedings may follow-often without any further personal warning.
Another commonly ignored communication is the notice seeking explanation for mismatches with AIS or Form 26AS. Taxpayers assume that since the income is correct “in substance,” no reply is required. Unfortunately, AI systems do not understand intent; they only read data. If no response is filed within the stipulated time, the system proceeds on the assumption that the mismatch is unexplained.
To understand how costly such non-response can be, consider this real-life example. A small taxpayer received a tax demand of nearly ₹42 lakh-without ever having intended to evade tax. He had purchased a residential house in 2022 for about ₹45 lakh, largely financed through a housing loan of ₹41 lakh. Like many ordinary buyers, he assumed that the bank loan itself explained the source of investment.
However, notices were issued seeking verification of the source of investment. These notices went unanswered. In the absence of any response, the Assessing Officer treated the total investment of ₹47.61 lakh (including stamp duty and registration charges) as unexplained and taxed it at the highest effective rate of around 78 per cent under section 115BBE (interest and penalty ignored for the moment).
The demand did not arise because the transaction was bogus, but because the explanation was never placed on record. What could have been resolved by submitting basic loan documents and purchase details has now snowballed into a massive tax demand and inevitable litigation at appellate levels.
This is not an isolated incident. I have handled numerous such cases where innocent taxpayers faced severe consequences-not because of concealment or wrongdoing, but because notices were ignored, missed, or misunderstood. Silence, unfortunately, is often treated as admission, and the cost of that silence can be devastating. In the majority of the cases, there is no concealment of income and no real tax liability at all. Had a simple reply been filed within time, explaining the mismatch or providing basic clarification, the proceedings would have closed without any demand. Instead, silence leads the system to draw adverse conclusions. Once a default occurs due to non-response-particularly in cases involving notices from the I&CI Wing or under section 148A-the matter often escalates from a simple clarification to full-fledged scrutiny or reassessment.
Another risky habit is relying on old or unused email IDs and mobile numbers. Many taxpayers change their contact details but never update them on the income-tax portal. Notices continue to be sent to those registered details. SMS alerts are treated even more casually. “I thought it was some promotional message,” is a common excuse. From the department’s perspective, service is complete. From the taxpayer’s perspective, the first shock often comes in the form of a demand notice or bank attachment.
The faceless system has reduced human interaction, but it has increased the importance of timely digital response. There is no officer to remind, no clerk to request for time, and no physical file to chase. Deadlines are system-driven. Once a window closes, reopening it becomes difficult and sometimes impossible.
Another misconception is that “my consultant will handle it.” Unless the consultant is actively monitoring the portal, emails, and SMS alerts, things can slip. Ultimately, the responsibility to respond lies with the taxpayer. Courts have repeatedly emphasized this principle. Delegation does not mean abdication.
Ignoring communications also affects refunds. Many refunds are withheld not because of any tax evasion, but due to pending responses or unresolved mismatches. Taxpayers keep waiting for refunds without realizing that a simple reply to an earlier email could have unlocked the amount months ago.
There is also a psychological aspect. Taxpayers tend to postpone uncomfortable emails from the tax department, assuming they will deal with them later. Later quietly becomes never. By the time action is taken, the situation worsens. The solution is simple: keep contact details updated, whitelist income-tax email domains, log in to the portal periodically, and read every communication calmly.
Most importantly, respond-even if the response is to seek time or clarification. Silence is interpreted as non-cooperation. A reply keeps doors open; non-response closes them. In today’s tax environment, ignoring income tax emails and SMS is not a sign of peace of mind-it is a recipe for future trouble. The department may be faceless, but its systems have long memories. And they never forget unanswered messages.
[Views expressed are the personal view of the author. Readers are advised to seek professional advice before taking any decisions. Readers may forward their feedback & queries at nareshjakhotia@gmail.com. Other articles & response to queries are available at www.theTAXtalk.com]
