The Jaipur bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) stated that as the intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 does not show in the tax portal hence there could not be any resulting issues referred to the assessment.
The taxpayer, Mr, Paras Kuhad is a Senior Advocate who practices in the Supreme Court of India and furnished the income return for the related year. The income return which was furnished would get amended u/s 139(5) on the date 30.09.2018 in the mentioned time limit of the law furnished for amending the return.
By showing the total income of Rs 6,19,02,760 the return was amended the amended return furnished via taxpayer treated as cognizance and the same was processed via the council and vide intimation u/s 143(1)(a) and made an addition on the differential income.
The taxpayer stated, the whole proceedings were finished in the pendency of the regular assessment proceedings u/s 143(2)&(3). Moreover, the calculation order on 25.3.2019 has been integrated with the final assessment order on 20.12.2019 in which no addition on the basis of the LTCG was incurred.
Therefore the same would be seen that the notice u/s 143(2) for scrutiny assessment (for the assessment year appeal) was issued in the taxpayer’s name dated 13.08.2018 which date is before the date notice u/s 143(1)(a) provided on the date 26.11.2018 which has culminated in the impugned order.
Permitting the taxpayer’s petition, Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, AM sees that “Since the very basis being the intimation dated 25.03.2019 is not reflected on the system and the consequent demand or adjustment already merged into the order of the AO passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. There cannot remain any grievance on account of the intimation dated 25.03.3019. Even the ld. AO has submitted a factual report and submitted that the intimation u/s. 143(1) dated 25.03.2019 is not reflected in the online system and consequent demand thereupon also. Thus, once the intimation which the very cause of the grievance of the assessee is not reflected and existed on records the consequent grievance also not existed and thus the appeal of the assessee becomes infructuous.”
| Case Title | Shri Paras Kuhad vs The DCIT |
| Citation | M.A.T. No.1595 of 2022 With I.A. No.CAN 1 of 2022 |
| Date | 26.09.2022 |
| Appellant | Shri O.P. Agarwal, CA Shri Maniesh Agarwal, CA |
| Revenue | Shri Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT-DR |
| Jaipur ITAT | Read Order |