Nagarjuna Vutla Vs ITO (ITAT Visakhapatnam)
Fraudulent Revised Return Without Assessee’s Consent — 143(1) Intimation Held Appealable; De Novo Assessment Directed
The ITAT Visakhapatnam dealt with a case where the assessee, a Non-Resident Individual, had duly filed and e-verified the original return of income, whereas a revised return was subsequently filed by a consultant without the assessee’s knowledge or consent, by forging the ITR-V and enhancing the returned income, which resulted in a tax demand of ₹12,93,760/- raised through intimation u/s 143(1). The assessee substantiated the allegation by lodging a Cyber Crime FIR, and it was also noticed that the income disclosed in the revised return did not match with the figures reflected in Form 26AS.
The Tribunal held that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine by holding that no appeal lies against such intimation under section 246A. Relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC), the ITAT observed that where there is total or partial denial of tax liability, the right of appeal cannot be denied on technical grounds. Accordingly, the matter was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to allow the assessee to file the correct return/computation along with supporting documents and to complete a de novo assessment in accordance with law, and the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
