Wp(C)/29941/2023 Of Anupama Pattanaik v. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Bbsr

Order No. 04. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.29941 of 2023 Anupama Pattanaik…. PetitionerMs. Kananbala Roy Choudhury, Advocate-versus- Principal Commissioner of …. Opposite PartiesIncome Tax, Odisha and others Mr. T. K. Satapathy, Senior Standing Counsel CORAM: ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE DR. B. R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN ORDER04.12.2023 1. The matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Ms. Kananbala Roy Choudhury, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. T. K. Satapathy, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Opposite Parties. 3. The Petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for quashing of the impugned letter under Annexure-5 and further seeking for a direction to the Opposite Parties to issue order of rectification within a stipulated time. 4. Ms. Choudhury has contended the impugned letter under Annexure-5 is barred by limitation and, therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition praying for quashing of the same. 5. With reference to Paragraph-7 of the counter affidavit filed by Opposite Parties No.1 to 3, Mr. Satapathy has contended that in view of the CBDT Circular No.4 of 2012 dated 20[th] June, 2012, necessary steps are being taken in accordance with law to sort out the issue. M. Panda 6. Both learned counsel for the parties have conceded that the present petition may be disposed of in terms of Paragraph-7 of the aforementioned counter affidavit. For ready reference, the said Paragraph-7 is quoted hereunder: “7. That it is humbly submitted that the petitioner has not filed any application before the Opp. Party No. 2 requesting for rectification of order passed by the CPC u/s. 154 of the I.T. Act dated 19.12.2014 during the period 07.01.2015 to 31.01.2020. The petitioner filed rectification petition during the month of February 2020 for the assessment year 2014-15 which was time barred on 31.10.2019. However, the case of the petitioner falls within the purview of CBDT Circular No. 4 of 2012 dated 20.06.2012 which enables the AO to carry out rectification in certain cases beyond the prescribed time limits u/s. 154(7) of the I.T. Act. Accordingly, rectification proceedings u/s. 154 of the I.T. Act has been initiated in AST module of ITD. However, while initiating the rectification proceeding in AST, a message showing “This rectification application is time barred, so you cannot proceed with rectification”. In this regard, a ticket has been raised in ITBA helpdesk in which reply is awaited. As soon as reply is received, the application of the petitioner will be disposed of immediately.” 7. As conceded by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the averments made in Paragraph-7 of the counter affidavit as quoted hereinabove, the writ petition stands disposed of in terms thereof. (DR. B. R. SARANGI) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE (M. S. RAMAN) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Digitally SignedSigned by: MRUTYUNJAYA PANDADesignation: SecretaryReason: AuthenticationLocation: High Court of Orissa, CuttackDate: 05-Dec-2023 16:52:07