By Advs.sri.harisankar v. Menon, Smt.meera V.menon

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/14TH MAGHA, 1938 WP(C).No. 3680 of 2017 (H) --------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- ANILKUMAR SHARMA,8/2117 A, SHARMA NIKETHAN,GUJARATHI ROAD, MATTANCHERRY,KOCHI-2. BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON, SMT.MEERA V.MENON. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CHITTOOR ROAD, KOCHI-11. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. rs. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 3680 of 2017 (H) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT-P1: COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT 20.09.2016. EXHIBIT-P1(A): NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT 05.12.2016. EXHIBIT-P2: COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT FOR 2014-15 DATED 30.12.2016. EXHIBIT-P3: COPY OF AIR TICKET TO DELHI FROM KOCHI DATED 19/12/2016. EXHIBIT P3A COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE PASSPORT OF THE PETITIONER WITH CHINESE VISA DATED 19/12/2016. EXHIBIT P3B COPY OF THE AIR TICKET TO KOCHI FROM DELHI DATED 10/12/2016. EXHIBIT-P4: COPY OF RECTIFICATION PETITION FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT DATED 16.01.2017. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. K. Vinod Chandran, J ---------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.3680 of 2017-H ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 03[rd] day of February, 2017 JUDGMENT The petitioner is aggrieved with the non-consideration ofExhibit P4 rectification application filed before the Assessing Officer. 2. The petitioner was issued with notices under Sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for brevity “the Act”],as seen from Exhibits P1 and P1(a). A reading of Exhibit P2 wouldindicate that there were other notices also issued. The CharteredAccountant of the petitioner also appeared before the AssessingOfficer. The notice proposed to assess the income at the hands ofthe petitioner, of amounts were shown as credit on loan acquiredfrom different persons. The petitioner was not able to producedocuments to substantiate such loans. In such circumstance, theassessment was finalised as per Exhibit P2. 3. The assessment order is appealable. However, the petitioner chose to file a rectification application, at Exhibit P4. Evenat that point of time the contention raised is that the returns of the parties who advanced loan have to be verified. To prove thegenuineness of the transaction, the petitioner also producedconfirmation letters. This would not amount to rectification of errors,since genuineness of the transaction would have to be consideredand decided which, in effect, would result in a review, which power isnot conferred on the authority. The proper remedy of the petitioner isto file an appeal, which the petitioner has to avail of.The writ petition would stand dismissed with liberty toavail of the appellate remedy. vku/- Sd/-K.Vinod Chandran Judge. [ true copy ]