2003 (5) TMI 22 - HC - Income Tax

Whether, an intimation making assessment under section 143(1)(a) could be rectified by resorting to section 154 after notice under section 143(2) has been issued for making a regular assessment under section 143 - held that the assessing authority was not justified in having recourse to the provisions of section 154 of the Act after the regular assessment proceedings came to be initiated and, therefore, he must proceed with regular assessment proceedings only Revenue s appeal dismissed

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 154 of the Income Tax Act regarding rectification of intimation after regular assessment proceedings are initiated.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Rajasthan involved a crucial issue regarding the interpretation of Section 154 of the Income Tax Act in the context of rectifying an intimation after the initiation of regular assessment proceedings. The case revolved around the question of whether the Assessing Officer could rectify an intimation under Section 143(1)(a) by resorting to Section 154 after issuing a notice under Section 143(2) for regular assessment. The court highlighted the significance of the procedural aspects involved in the assessment process and the limitations imposed by the statutory provisions.

The court examined the facts of the case where the assessee had claimed a deduction of Rs. 6,00,000 against a bank guarantee for bottling fee payment. The Assessing Officer had issued an intimation under Section 143(1)(a) without making any adjustments related to the deduction claimed. Subsequently, a notice under Section 143(2) was issued for regular assessment, followed by a notice under Section 154 to disallow the claimed deduction. The Tribunal had set aside the rectification order under Section 154, citing the absence of an apparent error on the face of the record, as per the decision in T.S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers [1971] 82 ITR 50.

The court emphasized that the issue of deduction claimed by the assessee was debatable and had been consistently allowed by the Tribunal, indicating a substantial question of law. Referring to its previous decision in a similar case, the court held that rectification under Section 154 was not permissible once regular assessment proceedings had commenced. The court relied on the Supreme Court's decision in CIT v. Gujarat Electricity Board [2003] 260 ITR 84 and aligned with the Calcutta High Court's view in CIT v. Coventry Spring and Co. Ltd. [2002] 257 ITR 632 to assert that the assessing authority must proceed with regular assessment proceedings without resorting to Section 154 after initiation.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the assessing authority was not justified in invoking Section 154 after the initiation of regular assessment proceedings. The judgment underscored the procedural integrity of the assessment process and the limitations on rectification once the regular assessment proceedings were underway, as established by statutory provisions and judicial precedents.