AO's rejection of Section 197(1) certificate application quashed for failing to examine circumstances under Rule 28AA properly

The Karnataka HC quashed the AO's rejection of petitioner's Section 197(1) certificate application for lower tax deduction. The AO had rejected the application solely because petitioner failed to file returns for four preceding years (2019-20 to 2022-23) before the subject financial year 2023-24. The HC held that under Section 197(1) read with Rule 28AA, the AO must record objective satisfaction determining existing and estimated liability of the assessee, considering prescribed factors including tax payable for four previous years, existing liability, and advance tax payments. The rejection based only on non-filing of returns without proper examination of circumstances under Rule 28AA was improper. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the petitioner could have been denied a Certificate under Section 197(1) of the IT Act for not filing returns for the preceding four years.
2. Whether the respondent's rejection of the petitioner's application was based on the "satisfaction" required under Section 197(1) of the IT Act.

Summary:

Issue 1: Denial of Certificate for Not Filing Returns for Four Years
The petitioner, a company incorporated in March 2021, challenged the respondent's order dated 28.02.2023, which rejected its application for a Certificate under Section 197 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for nil deduction of tax for the financial year 2023-24. The petitioner argued that the provisions of Section 197 do not envisage classification among Assessees based on the number of years for which returns have been filed. The court held that the provisions of Rule 28AA of the IT Rules cannot be read as stipulating that an assessee must have filed returns for the previous four years to be eligible to make an application under Section 197(1). The court emphasized that the details mentioned in Rule 28AA (2) should be considered in conjunction with other circumstances to determine the existing and estimated income, but failure to file returns for four years does not create an ineligibility to apply.

Issue 2: Satisfaction Required Under Section 197(1)
The court examined whether the respondent's rejection of the petitioner's application was based on the "satisfaction" contemplated under Section 197(1) of the IT Act. The court noted that the Assessing Officer must objectively determine the existing and estimated liability and income, considering the details mentioned in Rule 28AA (2) of the IT Rules. The court found that the reasons assigned by the respondent, including ambiguity in transactions with a related entity and potential liabilities under Section 201 of the IT Act, were extraneous to the merits of the petitioner's application. The court highlighted that the liability of another entity, even if related, should not affect the issuance of the Certificate to the petitioner.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the respondent's impugned order dated 28.02.2023 and restored the petitioner's application for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to reconsider the application, providing the petitioner an opportunity to justify its business, and to complete the consideration and communicate the decision by 13.12.2023.

---