GREEN APPLE SERVICED APARTMENTS,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW - 16 (3), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT held that the rectified intimation is an appealable order and the CIT(A) overlooked this fact. The tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed them to consider the assessee's grievance.
What were the facts?
The assessee's return was processed under section 143(1) with an income enhancement. The assessee filed a rectification application which was denied, leading to a rectified intimation. The assessee appealed against this rectified intimation.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal can be filed against a rectified intimation under section 154 when no appeal was filed against the original intimation under section 143(1).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM
आयकर अपील सं./ (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Green Apple Serviced Apartments ITO बनाम/ C/o Sri T.N. Seetharaman, Advocate NCW 16(3), # 384, (Old No. 196), Chennai. Vs. Lloyds Road, Chennai 600 086. �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. AAFTG-0137-F (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri R.K.V. Sundar (Advocate) – Ld. AR ��थ� की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT) –Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 04-04-2022 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 04-04-2022 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)
Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 26.08.2020 in the matter of intimation issued by CPC, Bengaluru u/s. 154 of the Act on 04.02.2020.
The Ld. AR submitted that the appeal has been dismissed on the ground that the assessee preferred an appeal against rectification order 2 - passed u/s. 154 but the assessee did not file any appeal against intimation issued u/s 143(1). The Ld. Sr. DR reiterated the position taken by Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. 3. The material facts are that the return of income as filed by the assessee on 31.03.2018 was processed by CPC, Bengaluru u/s 143(1) on 06.08.2019 wherein CPC enhanced the income by changing heads of income. The assessee filed rectification against the same on 13.01.2020 against which rectified intimation was issued on 04.02.2020 denying the adjustment as sought by the assessee. The assessee filed appeal against the same. However, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee did not file any appeal against intimation issued u/s 143(1) and therefore, the assessee could not make a back door entry by filing appeal against subsequent order passed u/s 154. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 4. We find that aggrieved by intimation dated 06.08.2019, the assessee filed rectification. However, in the rectified order, the grievance of the assessee was not settled and accordingly the assessee preferred further appeal against rectified order passed on 04.02.2020. We find that this order is an appealable order which fact has been overlooked by Ld. CIT(A). The grievance of the assessee against intimation issued u/s 143(1) as well as rectified intimation is the same. There was no requirement that the assessee should have first filed appeal against intimation u/s 143(1) and only thereafter, it could assail rectified order. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and direct Ld. CIT(A) to consider the grievance of the assessee and dispose-off the appeal by a speaking order. Needless to add that adequate opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee.
3 - 5. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 04th April, 2022.
(MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा�� /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद� / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे�ई / Chennai; िदनांक / Dated : 04-04-2022 JPV आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��यथ�/Respondent 3. आयकर आयु� (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु�/CIT 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध/DR 6. गाड� फाईल/GF
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026