Court :
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Brief :
The petitioner had filed return of income for the assessment year in question under Section 139(4) of the Act on 6th October, 2010. The contention of the petitioner is that the Assessing Officer could have initiated scrutiny assessment proceedings by issue of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act till 30th September, 2011. However, as per the petitioner, the Assessing Officer wrongly issued notice for reassessment under Section 147/148 of the Act on 5th July, 2011, and that on, before, or even after the said date, the Assessing Officer could have issued notice under Section 143(2). Accordingly, the notice under Section 147 is bad/invalid, as the return of the income could have been taken up for scrutiny by issue of notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. It is further submitted that if the Assessing Officer had issued notice under Section 143(2) on or before 30th September, 2011, the assessment would have become barred by limitation on 31st December, 2011 as per second proviso to Section 153(1). Thus, the proceedings that are now pending should be set aside/quashed
Citation :
Acorus Unitech Wireless Private Ltd. &Anr. ....Petitioners Through Mr. C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1) Delhi …Respondents Through Mr. Sanjeev Rajpal, Senior Standing Counsel.
Browse CAclubindia ads free.
Latest updates on WA.
Daily E-Newsletter and much more.
CCI PRO annual subscription :
Duration : 1 year
(Prices Inclusive of GST)
Input Tax Credit, GST refunds and Recovery of refunds- Roadblocks and way outs
GST LIVE Certification Course - 43rd Weekdays Batch(With Govt Certificate)