TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1049X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be disposed of and that too after we had taken cognizance of the grievance of the writ petitioners. If the AO were of the opinion that the powers of rectification did not stand conferred, it would have been well advised to desist from making observations pertaining to the merits of the application. Similarly, the fact that an appeal has not been filed would not constitute a valid ground for refusing to consider a rectification application provided the issues that are raised fall within the ambit of Section 154 of the Act. Respondents appearing on instructions submitted that against the various demands which remain outstanding, the petitioner has chosen not to invoke the appellate remedies available and has merely moved rectification applications. He has also alluded to the petitioner having not made any deposit against the outstanding demand. We may note that the total demand as per the Garnishee Notices is stated to be INR 17,16,85,384/-.However, and notwithstanding the above, Respondents submitted that the jurisdictional AO would have no objection to considering the rectification applications afresh in case such liberty were to be accorded by the Court. As we view the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a rectification application on 08 January 2024. That rectification application has come to be rejected by an order dated 12 February 2024. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Aniket D. Agrawal and Mr. Samarth Chaudhari, Adv. For the Respondents Through: Mr. Gaurav Gupta, Sr. Standing Cousnel along with Mr. Shivendra Singh and Mr. Puneett Singhal, Jr. Standing Counsels, Ms. Mahima Garg and Mr. Chandan Kumar, Adv. ORDER 1. These four writ petitions had principally assailed Garnishee Notices dated 31 January 2024 pursuant to which restraints came to be imposed upon the following bank accounts of the writ petitioner: S. No. Name of Bank A/c No. 1 State Bank of India, Nariman Point, Mumbai 31683260574 2 State Bank of India, Nariman Point, Mumbai 32262641347 3 ICICI Bank, Bandra (East), Mumbai 000805015468 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stake apparent from records which require rectification under Section 154 of the Act. As such, the Assessee has filed application dated 18 February 2021 before your good office to rectify the error in the order. Copy of application is enclosed herewith as Annexure III for your goodself s kind reference. The said rectification application is still pending for disposal by your good office as on date. 5 143(3) 2018-19 91,250 6 154 2020-21 7,450 In this regard, the assessee wish to highlight that rectification order dated 14 March 2022 was passed by CPC as per which tax demand of Rs. INR 1,22,310 was payable by Assessee. Further, the said tax demand was paid by Assessee on 13 April 2022 (i.e. within 30 days of rectification order). Copy of rectification order and challan is enclosed as Annexure IV and Annexure V for your goodself s kind reference. As such, since demand is paid within 30 days by Assessee, Assessee cannot by treated as Assessee in Default and no interest is payable under Section 220(1) of the Act. Howev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applications have come to be disposed of and that too after we had taken cognizance of the grievance of the writ petitioners. If the AO were of the opinion that the powers of rectification did not stand conferred, it would have been well advised to desist from making observations pertaining to the merits of the application. Similarly, the fact that an appeal has not been filed would not constitute a valid ground for refusing to consider a rectification application provided the issues that are raised fall within the ambit of Section 154 of the Act. 8. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing on instructions submitted that against the various demands which remain outstanding, the petitioner has chosen not to invoke the appellate remedies available and has merely moved rectification applications. He has also alluded to the petitioner having not made any deposit against the outstanding demand. We may note that the total demand as per the Garnishee Notices is stated to be INR 17,16,85,384/-. 9. However, and notwithstanding the above, Mr. Gupta submitted that the jurisdictional AO would have no objection to considering the rectification applications afresh in case such liberty were to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the pending rectification applications may be considered with due expedition and disposed of within a period of one week. 15. We additionally observe that insofar as W.P. (C) No. 1846/2024 is concerned, the case of the writ petitioner was that as per the rectification order dated 14 March 2022 passed by the CPC a demand of INR 1,22,310/- came to be created which was duly paid by the petitioner on 13 April 2022 and thus within 30 days of the passing of the aforesaid order. It is in the aforesaid context that they question the respondent treating it as an assessee in default and levying interest of INR 7450/- under Section 220(1) of the Act. In this respect, the assessee is stated to have filed a rectification application on 08 January 2024. That rectification application has come to be rejected by an order dated 12 February 2024. 16. Insofar as W.P. (C) 1848/2024 is concerned, the petitioner has yet again filed a rectification application dated 18 February 2021. The said application too has been disposed of by a separate order dated 12 February 2024. 17. However, and since orders disposing of the rectifications in W.P. (C) 1846/2024 and W.P. (C)1848/2024 have not been ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
