Prakash Ramchandra Prabhu Vs ITO (Karnataka High Court)
The Karnataka High Court dismissed the assessee’s appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act and upheld the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), holding that no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The appeal related to Assessment Year 2007-08 and challenged the refusal to condone the delay in filing an appeal against an intimation issued under Section 143(1), as well as the denial of exemption under Section 10(38).
The assessee had filed his return declaring total income of ₹2,59,44,190, including long-term capital gains of ₹2,58,60,190, which he claimed as exempt under Section 10(38). Although the gains were disclosed as exempt income in Schedule EI, the exemption was not reflected in the computation of total income. The return was processed under Section 143(1) on 20.03.2009, resulting in a demand of ₹74,10,326.
The assessee contended that the intimation under Section 143(1) was not served and that he became aware of the demand only upon receiving a communication under Section 245 on 06.11.2014 proposing adjustment of refund. He thereafter filed a revision petition under Section 264 on 14.07.2015 seeking cancellation of the demand, which was dismissed as time-barred. According to the assessee, a copy of the intimation under Section 143(1) was furnished only on 20.01.2017, following which he filed an application under Section 154 and an appeal before the CIT(A) on 25.03.2017.
