9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 581X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hows that the same is in the name of Jasjit Singh and not in the name of M/s Premier Security Services whereof Jasjit Singh claimed to be Proprietor. Impugned notice under Section 246 has been issued in the name of ''Jasjit Singh''. Assessment Orders, copies whereof have been filed, passed in the name of ''Jasjit Singh'. TDS certificates, which petitioner has placed on record, claiming their benefit show that on pages 27, 28 and 29 the same relate to ''Jasjit Singh' and on pages 32 to 45, the same relate to ''Birendra Singh'. Jasjit Singh may have earned income by running Premier Security Services, but ''Premier Security Services' is not an Assessee before Income Tax Department. Therefore this writ petition at the instance of "Prem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1961) informing petitioner that his refund of tax, already paid for Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as A.Y. ) 2013-14, is liable to be adjusted against demand outstanding against him being ₹ 567990/-, on 31.03.2013, and ₹ 1501170/- on 25.03.2014, relating to A.Ys. 2009-10 and 2010-11, respectively. Petitioner has further sought for a writ of Mandamus directing respondents to issue a refund voucher along with interest under Section 244A for A.Y. 2010-11. 2. Facts in brief stated in writ petition are that petitioner, Premier Security Services, is a proprietorship firm, assessed as ''individual', under Act, 1961, for A.Y. 2010-11. Return of income was filed through e-filin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,78,090/-. Order of assessment was appealable but it does not appear that any appeal was filed. Instead, an application dated 23.04.2013 under Section 154 was filed before DCIT stating that credit of TDS amount of ₹ 9,90,995/- has not been given. Said application was not decided and in the mean time impugned notice has been issued. 6. Learned Counsel for petitioner contended that if application under Section 154 is pending, respondent cannot adjust amount of tax refundable to petitioner against other outstanding dues and in any case notice under Section 245 is patently illegal. Large number of authorities have been cited with reference to scope of Section 244 and it is also contended that interest on the amount of refund is also st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n deep study and consideration thereof but coming to the conclusion that none has any application to the case in hand. 8. In short, record shows that Assessee before Income Tax Department is Jasjit Singh , an ''individual' having PAN No. ASSPS7046N. Writ petition has been filed by M/s Premier Security Services, through its Proprietor Jasjit Singh and not by Jasjit Singh himself. In fact photocopy of PAN Card has also been filed as part of affidavit and it also shows that the same is in the name of Jasjit Singh and not in the name of M/s Premier Security Services whereof Jasjit Singh claimed to be Proprietor. 9. Impugned notice under Section 246 has been issued in the name of ''Jasjit Singh'. Assessment Orders, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
