9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es For The Respondents : Sri K. V. Aravind, Advocate ORDER The petitioner has challenged the communication dated 15.03.2013 and 28.10.2015, at Annexure-D and Annexure-G respectively and the order at Annexure-J dated 16.02.2016 to the writ petition, whereby it has been held that the return filed is defective and the aggregate of shares as filed by the petitioner exceeds 100%, inter alia seeking ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... incipal Commissioner of Income Tax rejected the petitioner's application filed under Section-119(2)(b) of the Act without providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. Sri. K.V. Aravind, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would clearly submit that the return filed depicted correct shares aggregating 100%. However, the third respondent rejected the application filed under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this Court is of the considered opinion that the returns filed by the assessee was wrongly declared by the Income tax Department as invalid return under Section-139(9) of the Act. It is on the advise of the department an application under Section-119(2)(b) was filed to condone the delay in filing the returns. The said application has been rejected by the third respondent without providing an oppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said undertaking is placed on record. 8. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of, by quashing the Annexures-D, G and J. Respondent No.2 shall scrutinize the returns filed by the petitioner relating to the assessment year 2011-2012 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and pass appropriate orders in accordance with la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
