1992 (8) TMI 65 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to intimation u/s 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for assessment year 1990-91.

Summary:
The petitioners challenged an intimation issued by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1990-91. The intimation adjusted the total income of the petitioners, disallowing certain deductions and making additions based on revaluation reserves and changes in valuation methods. The court found that the adjustments made were beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer under section 143(1)(a) and were impermissible under the law. Specifically, the disallowance of a claim under section 115J was deemed unwarranted as the petitioners had not made a claim under section 80HHC, which required a specific certificate. The court referred to a previous judgment to support its interpretation of section 143(1)(a) and concluded that the intimation was erroneous and without jurisdiction, thus quashing it and setting it aside. The court directed the respondents to issue a fresh intimation order under section 143(1)(a) in accordance with the law and to make any necessary refund orders.

The judgment highlighted that the adjustments made by the Assessing Officer were not in line with the provisions of section 143(1)(a) and went beyond the permissible scope of adjustments under the law. The court specifically noted that the disallowance of a claim under section 115J was unjustified as the petitioners had not claimed under section 80HHC, which required a specific certificate. Referring to a previous case law, the court emphasized that the intimation issued was erroneous and lacked jurisdiction, leading to its quashing and setting aside. The court directed the issuance of a fresh intimation order under section 143(1)(a) and instructed for any necessary refund orders to be made in accordance with the law.

The judgment concluded by quashing the impugned intimation dated July 22, 1991, and setting aside the claim for additional tax under section 143(1A). The court directed the respondents to issue a fresh intimation order under section 143(1)(a) following the legal principles established in the judgment and to make any consequential refund orders as required. The rule was made absolute accordingly, with no order as to costs.