Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
WRIT PETITION NO.1844 OF 2022 (T - IT)
BETWEEN:
Bhadra Paper Mills Limited, No.23/14, Jala Shambhavai Complex, I main Road, Bangalore North, Bangalore-560009. Rep. by its Managing Director, Sri. Madesh Lakshman. … Petitioner (By Sri.M.V.Sheshachala, Senior Advocate for Sri. Aravind V Chavan, Adv. for petitioner)
AND:
Assistant Director of Income Tax,
Central Processing Centre,
Queens Road,
Bangalore-560001.
Principal Director of Income Tax,
Central Processing Centre,
Queens Road,
Bangalore-560001.
...Respondents (By Sri.K.V.Aravind, Advocate)
2 ***** This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash the intimation under section 143(1) of the IT Act dated 06.08.2021 Annexure-D passed by the R-1 for AY 2020-21 and etc.
This Writ Petition coming on for Orders, this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R
The petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of certiorari to quash the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act dated 06.08.2021 at Annexure-D passed by respondent No.1 for the Assessment Year 2020-21.
Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that petitioner is entitled for addition / deduction as regards to the payments made in terms of 1st proviso to Section 43(A). It is further submitted that under 1st proviso to Section 143(1), adjustments are not to be made unless an intimation given to the assessee
3 for such adjustments and that no such notice regarding the addition has been made.
It is further submitted that once any intimation is made under 1st proviso to Section 143(1), petitioner would put forth his responses, which shall be considered while making adjustments in terms of 2nd proviso.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that time for filing the return has been extended from 30.10.2020 to 28.02.2021, which aspect also needs to be taken note of while considering the deductions that the petitioner is entitled to under 1st proviso of Section 43(A).
Without entering into the merits of the matter, in light of the I proviso to Section 143(1), as it is the assertion of the petitioner that no notice regarding adjustments has been issued under Section 143(1), the intimation at Annexure-D is set aside. Matter is remitted to the respondent No.1 to redo the proceedings insofar as
4 adjustments is concerned in light of 1st proviso to Section 143(1).
Accordingly, the petition is disposed off.
Sd/- JUDGE