2020 (11) TMI 227 - HC - Income Tax

Rectification application u/s 154 - petitioner has prayed for deletion of addition made to the returned income u/s 143(1) by Centralized Processing Centre on account of alleged delay in deposit of Provident Fund, Employees State Insurance and Tax Deducted at Source as well as to grant refund as claimed in the return of income along with interest under Section 244A - HELD THAT - The present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to decide the petitioner s rectification applications in accordance with law by way of a reasoned order within four weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left open.

Summary

Issues:
1. Delay in deciding rectification application under Section 154(8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Jurisdiction for filing rectification application - Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) or Assessing Officer.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the respondent to decide the rectification application dated 26th December, 2019, which requested the deletion of an addition of ?6,17,030 made to the returned income under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and to grant a refund of ?1,33,250 along with interest under Section 244A of the Act. The petitioner argued that the respondent erred by not passing the order on the rectification application within the time limit prescribed under Section 154(8) of the Act. The court issued notice on the matter.

2. The respondent, represented by Mr. Ajit Sharma, contended that since the addition to the returned income was made by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), the rectification should have been filed with the CPC and not with the Assessing Officer, citing Clause 9 of the Scheme framed under Section 143(1A) of the Act. In response, the petitioner's counsel, Mr. Mukesh Gupta, stated that the CPC had communicated to the petitioner that the rectification would be carried out by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The court took the communication dated 18th March, 2020, shared by the petitioner, on record.

3. After considering the arguments presented, the court disposed of the writ petition with a direction for the respondent to decide the petitioner's rectification application within four weeks by way of a reasoned order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The court emphasized that the decision should be made in accordance with the law, and all rights and contentions of the parties were left open. The court ordered the uploading of the decision on the website immediately and directed the forwarding of a copy of the order to the learned counsel through e-mail.