M/S. Idfc Ltdkrm Towers 7[Th] Floor v. The Assistant Commissioner (St),Ambattur Assessment Circle,Integrated Commercial Taxes Andregistration Building,Room

W.P.No.6263 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.11.2024 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.No.6263 of 2022andW.M.P.Nos.6335 & 6337 of 2022 M/s. IDFC LtdKRM Towers 7[th] Floor,No.1, Harrington Road,Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031 Represented by it Managing DirectrShri Sunil Kakar ....Petitioner Vs The Assistant Commissioner (ST),Ambattur Assessment Circle,Integrated Commercial Taxes andRegistration Building,Room No.322, IIIrd Floor, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035 ....Respondent PRAYER:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the respondent in TIN:33061364218/2016-17 dated 23.05.2022 quash the same and further direct the respondent to grant a reasonable opportunity for the production of records to prove that the service tax of Rs.4,00,60,453/- was collected and paid to the Central Government on “Service income Rs.28,00,51,076/-” and exclude the turnover of Rs.1,70,88,748/- relating to sales turnover of Andhra Pradesh Branch which ought not be assessed by the respondent herein. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ________ For Petitioner For Respondent W.P.No.6263 of 2022 : Mr.Niraj D Shanth For Mr.S.P.Chidambaram For Mr.S.P.Chidambaram : Mr.B.Ramanakumar Government Advocate Government Advocate O R D E R The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned notice dated 30.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of Income Tax Tact and the consequential speaking order dated 15.02.2022 overruling the objection of the petitioner. 2. The dispute in this case pertains to the assessment year 2015-2016. The regular assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was completed on 27.12.2018. Thereafter, the impugned notice dated 30.03.2021 was issued to the petitioner. The reasons for issuing the notice for reopening of the assessment that was completed on 27.12.2018 under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was also communicated to the petitioner on 04.05.2021. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the reasons given for reopening of the assessment that was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 27.12.2018 vide impugned notice https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis________Page 2 of 6 W.P.No.6263 of 2022 dated 30.03.2021 issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is inspired from change of opinion. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner has not suppressed any material information that was required for completing the assessment. That apart, it was submitted that out of the five reasons mentioned, four of the issues were also the subject matter of the discussion in the assessment order dated 27.12.2018 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire proceeding is liable to be quashed as it is contrary to the well settled principle of law held in the Judgements rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commisioner of Income Tax Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd reported in 320 ITR 561. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that, under proviso to Section 147 of Income Tax Act as it stood prior to 01.04.2021, the Department could issue the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1971. It is submitted that, mere production of voluminous document ipso-facto would not be sufficient for coming to a conclusion when there was a full disclosure.https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis________ W.P.No.6263 of 2022 7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that, under proviso to Section 147 of Income Tax Act as it stood prior to 01.04.2021, the Department could issue the notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1971. It is submitted that, mere production of voluminous document ipso-facto would not be sufficient for coming to a conclusion when there was a full disclosure.https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis________ W.P.No.6263 of 2022 7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 8. Assessment order dated 27.12.2018 was passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after all the records were furnished for completing the assessment. Even if the order passed by the Assessing Officer erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of natural Revenue, the only remedy that was available to the Department was under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act or under Section 154 of the Income Tax if there was an error in the computation of the deduction claimed by the petitioner and allowed in the Assessment Order dated 27.12.2018. Neither Section 263 was invoked nor Section 154 was invoked by the respondent. The limitation for revising the assessment order dated 27.12.2014 passed under Section 143(3) of the Act would have expired on 31.03.2022. 9. Having sat over, the rights the Department cannot invoke the machinery under Section 148 for the purpose of Section 147 of the Income Tax Act as it stood prior to 01.04.2021. 10. In view of the above, the Writ Petition deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ________ Index :Yes/NoNeutral Citation : YesSpeaking order : YesSma https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ________ W.P.No.6263 of 2022 21.11.2024 C.SARAVANAN, J Sma To The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Ambattur Assessment Circle, Integrated Commercial Taxes andRegistration Building,Room No.322, IIIrd Floor,Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035Registration Building,Room No.322, IIIrd Floor,Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035 ________ W.P.No.6263 of 2022 W.P.No.6263 of 2022 21.11.2024