https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383012 For the purpose of Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, an intimation under Section 143(1) can be treated as an order and is therefore revisable where it causes prejudice to the assessee. The Delhi HC followed its earlier jurisdictional view and held that the contrary reopening context under Sections 147 and 148 was not relevant. It further held that excess tax paid because the assessee was entitled to the lower DTAA rate, including the protocol benefit, constituted prejudice. On that basis, the assessee was entitled to rectification, application of the treaty rate, and refund of the excess tax, surcharge and cess with interest. en-us Wed, 10 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jul 2019 10:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383012 For the purpose of Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, an intimation under Section 143(1) can be treated as an order and is therefore revisable where it causes prejudice to the assessee. The Delhi HC followed its earlier jurisdictional view and held that the contrary reopening context under Sections 147 and 148 was not relevant. It further held that excess tax paid because the assessee was entitled to the lower DTAA rate, including the protocol benefit, constituted prejudice. On that basis, the assessee was entitled to rectification, application of the treaty rate, and refund of the excess tax, surcharge and cess with interest. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383012