TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ty by filing revised returns though it is belated, as the time is lost by initiating proceedings in revision under the confusion that a revision lies against the said order. The petitioner himself is at fault in seeking revision and there is no fault of the Department in accepting such returns filed and the intimation sent, prayer of the petitioner to direct the 1st respondent to reconsider the returns filed by him or for refund of the amount cannot be granted, since there is no wrong assessing and the revision filed by the petitioner before the CIT itself is not maintainable, AO of the respondent authority directed to consider the application of the petitioner for refund of the amount which was deducted at source by the employer and remitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the employer to deduct TDS at source on the alleged perks. However, he filed the return of income and intimation was issued to the petitioner by the 2nd respondent as per s. 143(1)(a) of the IT Act accepting the returns filed. Immediately, after receipt of the intimation, pursuant to the decision of the Tribunal, the petitioner filed a revision before the 1st respondent during November 2003 seeking revision of the assessment order and the said revision petition came to be rejected, which the petitioner is challenging stating that the said order is nan est and refund lies and the effect of the amendment to s. 143(1) of the Act comes into effect only from the subsequent year and not for the assessment year. Accordingly, contending that the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Asstt. CIT (2009) 30 DTR (Kar) 277. Accordingly, learned counsel has sought for allowing the petition directing the 1st respondent to refund the amount deducted towards perks. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent authority, relying upon the decision of the apex Court in the case of CIT us. Isthmian Steamship Lines (1951) 20 ITR 572 (SC) in Civil Appeal No. 58 of 1951, contended that it applies to the assessment year unless otherwise stated or implied. The self-assessment made by the petitioner has been accepted by the assessing authority and the amendment or revision of the very assessment for refund of the amount has to be sought before the very assessing authority by filing an application, so that he would consider the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rks. Subsequently, pursuant to the challenge made by the employer before the Tribunal, since the Tribunal pursuant to the repealing of the amendment to s. 143(5) has opined that the value of the shares allotted would not result in any perks to the employee until the expiry of the lock in period i.e., unless the maturity of the stock, the question of deducting the tax at source would not arise and it would inure to the benefit of the petitioner, as such, petitioner has sought for refund of the amount which was so deducted at source. 9. In view of the judgment of the apex Court that such an amendment relates to the assessment year and not to the financial year, unless it is made clear in such an amendment as to whether it comes into effec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
