Case Law Details
Radharaman Jew Trust Fund Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
The question for my consideration is whether the action of AO while issuing an intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act by changing the status of the assessee which consequently enhanced the tax liability of the assessee was permissible.
Change of status as done by the AO does not fall within any of the clauses from (a) to (e) of section 143(1) of the Act. It cannot also be said that change of status of an assessee would fall within the meaning of the expression “an incorrect claim apparent from any information in the return” as laid down in Explanation (a) to section 143(1) of the Act. There was no inconsistency entries in the return of income. There was no entry on which information was required to be furnished under this act which was omitted to be furnished. There was no deduction claimed beyond the statutory limit by the assessee. I therefore hold that the intimation issued by the AO u/s 143(1) of the Act changing the status of the assessee was not in accordance with the provisions of law. The AO is therefore directed to modify the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act accepting the return of income of the assessee as it is and issue refund as claimed by the assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:-
This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 31.05.2016 of C.I.T.(A)-13, Kolkata relating to A.Y.2011-12.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
