TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned counsel on either side and therefore, passed an order of status quo. That could not be a factor to interfere with the order passed by the AO, when there is an effective appeal remedy available before the Commissioner (Appeals) within a period of thirty days. Therefore, without availing such remedy, the petitioner has approached the Court. In the absence of any infringement of fundamental rights, violation of principles of natural justice or anything contrary to law, there is no possibility of any scope of interference of this nature, when such a matter can be adjudicated before the appellate authority. Thus, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner move the appellate authority within a period of four (4) w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s per the rate applicable and prescribed in Rule 5(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short 'Rules'). In respect of the Assessment Year 2005-2006, being the first year of claim, a Return of Income was filed on 30.10.2007 returning Nil income. A notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued calling upon the petitioner to file various particulars that was duly complied with. The petitioner furnished books of accounts, such as Cash Book, Bank Book, General Ledger Journal and Stock Register and various other details called for and the respondent completed the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 07.12.2009. 5. While so, the petitioner was surprised to receive a notice dated 28.03.2012 issued by the respondent unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent that the proposed assessment was not tenable in law or on facts. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner received an order dated 06.02.2013 from the respondent arbitrarily rejecting the objections filed by the petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said order, seeking to quash the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.7545 of 2013 and this Court, after hearing the submissions on either side, granted an order of status quo till 02.04.2013, vide order dated 26.03.2013. However, to the utter shock and surprise, the petitioner received an order of assessment dated 22.03.2013 raising a demand of Rs.2,23,15,887/-, which is impugned in this Writ Petition. 8. The respondent has filed counter affidavit and has stated that the petitioner's claim of depr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner, which is an effective statutory remedy. 11. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an assessee and filed its return of Income Tax for the Assessment Year 2007-2008 on 30.10.2007 and declared the total income as 'nil', after claiming deduction of Rs.1,56,07,769/- under Section 80IB of the Act. Assessment under Section 143(3) was completed on 07.12.2009 determining the total income at Rs.4,79,581/- after disallowing certain expenses relating to legal expenses, guest house expenditure and vehicle maintenance. However, for tax calculation, book profit determined under Section 115JB admitted by the assessee-company was taken. Subsequently, on verification of records, the Department found that the depreciation claimed is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
