Wp/25363/2022 Of Azim Premji Trustee Company Pvt Ltd v. Additional Director Of Income Tax

Digitally signedby ANAND NLocation: HIGHCOURT OFKARNATAKA IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19 DAY OF JANUARY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD -WRIT PETITION NO. 25363 OF 2022 (TRES) BETWEEN: AZIM PREMJI TRUSTEE COMPANY PVT LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 SOLE TRUSTEE OF AZIM PREMJI TRUST SETTLED UNDER THE INDIAN TRUSTS ACT 1882) NO 134M DODDAKANNELLI SARJAPUR ROAD NEXT TO WIPRO CORPORATE OFFICE BANGALORE 560035 REPRESENTED HEREIN BY ITS DIRECTOR MR SRINIVASAN PAGALTHIVARTHI. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SANDEEP HUILGOL.,ADVOCATE) AND: 1. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BANGALORE CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU - 560500. CPC BANGALORE CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BENGALURU - 560500. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 4 (1) (1) BANGALORE BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE CIRCLE 4 (1) (1) BANGALORE BMTC BUILDING 80 FEET ROAD, 6 BLOCK, NEAR KHB GAMES VILLAGE KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU - 560095. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI., ADVOCATE) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TOQUASH THE INTIMATION DATED 01.12.2022 BEARING DIN CPC/2122/A5/317198462, ACK NO.826389050311221 AND DEMAND REFERENCE NO.202220213713751016T ISSUED BY THE R1 U/S 143(1) OF THE IT ACT ANNEXURE-A; RESTRAIN THE RESPONDENTS FROM ADJUSTING ANY REFUNDS U/S 245 OF THE IT ACT AGAINST THE IMPUGNED INTIMATION DATED 01.12.2022 BEARING DIN CPC/2122/A5/317198462, ACK NO.826389050311221 AD DEMAND REFERECE NO.2022202137137251016T ISSUED BY THE R1 U/S 143(1) OF THE IT ACT ANNEXURE-A. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ORDER It is submitted in unison by Sri. Sandeep Huilgol, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri E.I.Sanmathi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, that the petition is rendered infructuous with the subsequent rectification order under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, Sri Sandeep Huilgol submits that the petitioner would be entitled to file a further rectification application because of the rate that is applied in the rectification order. At this stage, nothing is brought on record that would impede reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh application for rectification limited to the rate of tax as pointed out and as such, the petition stands disposed of with liberty, subject to all just exceptions in law, to the petitioner to file another rectification application. Sd/- JUDGE NV