Samsung C And T Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
ITAT Delhi held that intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act being passed without waiting for the response of the assessee and without providing thirty day time for filing response is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, appeal allowed.
Facts- The assessee company filed its return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 29.11.2017 at NIL income which was revised u/s 139(5) on 22.03.2018. The return was processed u/s 143(1) on 30.03.2019 at an income of Rs.74,08,040/- after making addition/disallowance vide intimation u/s. 143(1). CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- Tribunal in the case of Income Tax Officer (Exemption) vs. Camellia Educare Trust it has been held that the documentary evidence placed on record and the e-proceedings downloaded from the Income-tax portal, no where suggests that such a process has been followed. Thus, we find that the impugned intimation issued u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act, dated 30-11-2021 is not in compliance with the 1st proviso to section 143(1)(a) of the Act and thus, the impugned intimation is invalid under the Act.
Held that the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act has been passed on 30.03.2019, without waiting for the response of the assessee for which time available to the assessee was 22.04.2019, as evident from the copy of the notice under section 143(1)(a) dated 23.03.2019 and the so called response submitted by the assessee on 23.03.2019, being not correct as discussed above. Therefore, relying on the above decision, we hold that intimation order u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 30.03.2019 is bad in law and therefore the disallowance of Rs.74,08,038/- made by the Assessing Officer vide the said order is deleted.
