PALGANJ PRIYAMARY AGRICULTURE CREDIT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,GIRIDIH vs. ITO, GIRIDIH
Facts
The assessee filed two appeals against orders passed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act by the CPC, which were subsequently confirmed by the CIT(A), Jaipur, for assessment years 2021-2022 and 2022-2023. The assessee contended that no show cause notice was issued prior to making adjustments in the intimation, which is a mandatory requirement under the first proviso to Section 143(1).
Held
The Tribunal observed that the revenue failed to produce evidence of any show cause notice being issued to the assessee before the adjustments were made in the intimation under Section 143(1). Reiterating that a show cause notice is compulsory before making adjustments under Section 143(1) of the Act, the Tribunal quashed the intimation and the consequent order passed by the CIT(A) due to this procedural lapse.
Key Issues
Validity of an intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act making adjustments without prior issuance of a mandatory show cause notice.
Sections Cited
Section 143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC BENCH”, RANCHI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
These two appeals filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Jaipur, both dated 23.01.2025 for the assessment year 2021-2022 & 2022-2023. 2. Shri Devesh Poddar, ld.AR represented on behalf of the assessee. Shri Khubchand T Pandya, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that these two appeals are against the order u/s.143(1) of the Act issued by the CPC, which has been confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that as per the provisions of section 143(1) of the Act, before making any adjustment, a show cause notice has to be issued to the assessee. It was the submission that no show cause notice has been issued to the assessee, therefore, the intimation issued u/s.143(1) is liable to be quashed and in consequence thereof the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) deserves to be dismissed.
At the time of hearing, Ld.Sr. DR was asked to show the show cause notice issued as per the proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act before issuance of the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act. The Sr. DR was unable to show the copy of the show cause notice as required under the first proviso to Section 143(1) of the Act before making any adjustments in the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act.
I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act also does not show of any show cause notice being issued to the assessee. Even the ld. CIT(A) has not taken into consideration that no show cause notice has been issued to the assessee before making adjustment in the order passed u/s.143(1) of the Act by the CPC. A perusal of provisions of section 143(1) of the Act shows that it is compulsory for the revenue to issue show cause notice before making any adjustment in the intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act. This being so, as no show cause notice under the provisions of section 143(1) of the Act has been issued before making adjustment, the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act in both the appeals of the assessee stands quashed and in consequence thereof the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) in both the appeals also stands unsustainable.
In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 25/11/2025. (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यायिक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER रधाँची Ranchi; दिनांक Dated 25/11/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनिलिपि अग्रेपर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- . 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 2. 3. आयकि आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. निभागीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकि अपीलीय अनर्किण, रधाँची / DR, ITAT, Ranchi 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, सत्यापपत प्रतत //// (Senior Private Secretary) आयकर अिीिीय अधर्करण, रधाँची / ITAT, Ranchi
