2009 (12) TMI 294

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3)/147 of the Act by the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-2, Durgapur, respondent No. 2 and the notice of demand issued pursuant thereto and the notice dated March 16, 2009, under section 226(3) of the Act for recovery of income-tax demanded relating to the assessment year 2004-05 and proceedings thereunder and in pursuance thereof. 2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner is engaged in the business of mechanical fabrication and erection pursuant to orders received from customers. At times, a part of the contract is entrusted to sub-contractors. From the payments required to be made to the sub-contractors, the petitioner deducts income-tax at source wherever required in accordance with the provisions contained in section....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d to an amount under section 43B, the Assessing Officer was not competent to take up the matter regarding the amount paid to the sub7f contractors. However, the petitioner made an enquiry regarding the said sum. On enquiry it was found that her learned advocate and the accountant had made a mistake in filing the return. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed the order under sections 143(3)/147 in the proceedings under section 148 of the Act. The petitioner on April 3, 2008 filed an application under section 264 of the Act against the order under section 143(3)/147 dated December 11, 2007. A report on the petition under section 264 of the Act was called for from the Assessing Officer. Report was received. The petitioner was asked to furnis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was violation of natural justice. Further, the respondents have not disputed the two affidavits filed by the learned advocate and the accountant wherefrom it is evident that the mistake was unintentional. 5. Mr. Farhan Ghaffar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents, relying on the statements made in the affidavit-in-opposition has submitted that the entire exercise of the petitioner was an afterthought and, therefore, the action by the respondents was just and proper. 6. In reply, it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no denialthat the petitioner had submitted the revised return and the copy of theverification report was not furnished to the petitioner. Moreover, theauthenticity of the documents ....