9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was received by the assessee in the month of March-2006 - Immediately, thereafter an application u/s.154 was moved on 20th March-2006 - where the assessee disputes and requests for correction of the figures of arrear demand, whether uploaded on CPC or not uploaded and still lying in the records of the Assessing Officer, the jurisdictional Assessing Officer shall verify the claim of the assessee on merits and after due verification of such claim, will make suitable correction in the figure of arrear demand in his records and upload the correct figure of arrear demand on CPC portal - the grievance of the assessee is well-founded - the AO is directed to entertain the rectification application dated 20/03/2006 and dispose it off as per law after verification of record as also the eligibility of the claim – Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No.337/Ahd/2010 - - - Dated:- 10-5-2013 - MUKUL Kr.SHRAWAT AND ANIL CHATURVEDI, JJ. For the Appellant : Sunil H. Talati. For the Respondent : T. Shankar. ORDER:- PER : Mukul Kr. Shrawat This is an appeal filed by the Assessee arising from the order of ld.CIT(Appeals)-I, Baroda dated 08/12/2009 passed for A.Y.1998-99. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decided the issue against the assessee as follows:- "5. I have considered the submissions of the ld. A.R. and the facts of the case. It is seen that from the report of the AO that intimation u/s.143(1)(a) had not been served on the assessee. However, as per sub-section (7) of sec. 154, the rectification can be made only before the expiry of four years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be amended was passed. In this case, the impugned order was passed on 30.6.1999. Hence the period of limitation expired on 31.3.2004. the application has been made on 20.3.2006. This is clearly out of time. The section does not speak of four years from the date of service of the order but four years from the end of the financial year in which such order was passed. Accordingly, it is held that the AO had rightly declined to rectify the order. The action of the AO is upheld and this ground of appeal thus fails." 3. From the side of the appellant, ld. AR Mr. Sunil H Talati has intimated that in the light of the provisions of section 143(1)(a) an intimation has to be sent to the assessee. Since the second copy was not sent to the assessee, therefore there was no ser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of limitation as raised by the Revenue was against the natural justice as well as unjustifiable. Provisions of section 143(1)(a) as stood at the relevant time for AY 1998-99, placed before us by the assessee, are reproduced below:- "Where a return has been made under section 139/142(1), (i) If any tax or interest is found due on the basis of such return, after adjustment of any tax deducted at source, any advance tax deducted at source, any advance tax paid and any amount paid otherwise by way of tax or interest, then without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (2), an intimation shall be sent to the assessee specifying the sum so payable, and such intimation shall be deemed to be a notice of demand issued under section 156 and all the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly; and (ii) If any refund is due on the basis of such return, it shall be granted to the assessee;" 5.2. Since the law prescribes that an intimation has to be sent to the assessee specifying the sum so payable and that intimation shall be deemed to be a notice of demand u/s.156 of IT Act, therefore the issuance of such an intimation is absolutely necessary. The un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty, therefore we are of the view that the assessee is justified in raising this issue and the only recourse available to him was to move a petition u/s.154 of IT Act. The law is very well settled that if there is a breach of a statutory obligation, then a person committed such breach cannot be permitted to take advantage of such situation, so as to prejudice the interest of the effected person. Otherwise the Latin maxim is directly on the issue, quote "Commodum ex injuria sua nemo habere debet" unquote. 5.4. We have also been informed that a photocopy of the impugned intimation u/s.143(1)(a) was received by the assessee in the month of March-2006. Immediately, thereafter an application u/s.154 was moved on 20th March-2006. Rather, in the month of March-2006, the AO had called upon the assessee asking the payment of outstanding demand. Our attention has been drawn on a CBDT Circular No.73 dated 7th January-1972 which states as under:- "CIRCULAR NO.73, DATED JANUARY 7, 1972 Subject : Section 154(2)(b) - Applications for rectification of Mistakes - Statutory time-limit - Waiver of. In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub0-section (2) of secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
