2020 (12) TMI 308

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....13. 2. Heard Mr.Suhrith Parthasarathy, learned Counsel for Mr.Arun Karthick Mohan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, learned Counsel for the respondents. 3. The primary ground for challenge to the impugned assessment order is that the petitioner was not given any opportunity to seek the reasons for reopening the assessment or submit his objections to the reopening of the assessment in accordance with the principles laid down by Honourable Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts vs. Income Tax Officer, reported in (2003) 1 SCC 72, for reopening of assessment. According to the petitioner, the respondents have wrongly stated in the assessment order that "the assessee has not even attempted to file a return sta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eturns manually. 6. It is also the contention of the respondents, as seen from the counter affidavit that even prior to the merger with the petitioner's company, M/s.OAS Digital Infrastructure Private Limited, never filed their returns with the respondents. According to the respondents, since the petitioner did not file any return of income, they are not entitled for any indulgence by this Court. The respondents have passed the impugned assessment order against the petitioner on the ground that M/s.OAS Digital Infrastructure Private Limited, received payments under various Sections of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as detailed hereunder: "a. Contract receipts under Section 194C-Rs. 1,61,50,354/- b. Professional receipts ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tronically with regard to the alleged suppression of income made by M/s.OAS Digital Infrastructure Private Limited. According to the petitioner, the returns filed by the petitioner subsequent to the initiation of reopening of the assessment proceedings by the respondents were returned with an error report, since the e-portal of the respondents does not permit a company, which has been merged with another company pursuant to an amalgamation order passed by a Court, to submit its report electronically. 10. It is also an admitted fact that the current Income Tax Rules does not permit filing of returns manually. While that be so, the benefit of doubt should be given to the assessee. It is the case of the petitioner that they were unable to s....