K1 SECURITY SERVICES PVT LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

Shri A.K.Padhy, A.K.Padhy, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR appeared for the revenue. DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that no reason has been given for making adjustment u/s.143(1) of the Act. The returned income of the assessee is 27,05,009/- but as per the intimation, the income of the assessee is assessed at Rs.4,72,31,705/- i.e. the entire expenditure of the assesse has been disallowed and the total receipts of the assessee for the impugned assessment year has been brought to tax. Page 5 of 15 of the intimation issued u/s.143(1) talks of detailed note having been sent as annexure to the email. Ld AR has placed before us the screen shot of the email account, wherein, there is no mention of any email having been received from the CPC. It was the submission of ld AR that under 143(1), what can be done is only arithmetical errors or mistakes apparent from the record. It was the submission that there was no mistake apparent from record. It was the submission that the intimation passed u/s.143(1) of the Act is liable to be quashed.

In reply, ld CIT DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A).

We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the intimation has been issued u/s.143(1) of the Act without mentioning the reasons for denial of the expenses claimed and as the intimation does not satisfy the mistake apparent from the record, the intimation as issued u/s.143(1) assessing the assessee’s income at Rs. .4,72,31,705/- stands quashed. P a g e 2 | 3

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stand allowed.