TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 242
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under Section 144-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In W.P.No.1561 of 2019, the petitioner has challenged the consequential Assessment Order dated 27.12.2018 passed by the first respondent. In W.P.No.1567 of 2019 the petitioner has prayed for a writ of prohibition, prohibiting the respondents from taking any action to make additions in its Income Tax Assessment for the assessment year 2016-17 in respect of expenditure incurred towards procurement of raw materials from M/S.MRF SG OTE Ltd under either section 40A(2) or Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The dispute in this case pertains to the assessment year 2016- 17. The petitioner had filed returns under Section 139 of the "Income Tax Act, 1961" ( "IT Act, 1961" for the sake of br....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he petitioner, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that under Section 144 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before the Joint Commissioner namely the second respondent herein could pass any prejudicial order against the petitioner, a notice of hearing ought to have been given to the petitioner as much as the direction of the second respondent stipulates that 2.5 per cent of the transacted amount amounting to Rs.28,05,26,782/- is to be disallowed. The fact that the 2nd respondent passed an order dated 21.12.2018 was not known to the petitioner. 7. Learned Senior Counsel further submits that explanation to Section 144 A also will not apply to the situation under consideration as the directions are not in line with the letter and a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r the expiry of the time limit prescribed in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to supra and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad referred to supra. 11. Learned Senior Counsel,also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2009 6 SCC 372 STATE OF U.P.v.PARAS NATH SINGH (Criminal Appeal No. 499 of 2004) MAY 5, 2009 and referred to para 6 from the said judgement which reads as under: 6. Use of the expression, `official duty' implies that the act or omission must have been done by the public in the course of his service and that it should have been in discharge of his duty. The Section does not extend its protective cover to every act or mission done by a public serva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e the direction was prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner the directions of the second respondent could not be the basis of the assessment. 17. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Counsel for the respondents and I have also perused the impugned orders and the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and that of the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad cited above. 18. This Court is not sitting as an Appellate Court while exercising its Jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, I am refraining from making any observation on the correctness of the computation of the income in the impugned Assessment order dated 27.12.2018. 19. At ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12.2018 at 5.30 p.m. Immediately, an opportunity given to the assessee-company to furnish their reply by 24.12.2018. On 24.12.2018, the assessee company requested further time to furnish their reply. Accordingly, the assessee-company was granted another opportunity to furnish the reply by 26.12.2018. The assessee- company has given final reply on 26.12.2018. The assessee-company was granted another opportunity to furnish the reply by 26.12.2018. The assessee company should note that in the crutial period of finizaling the scrutiny assessment order, the undersigned does not have much time to allocate to submit the reply. Still another opportunity given to the assessee- company to file their reply on 26.12.2018. Hence, the principle of natura....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s to precede with an opportunity of being heard under Section 144A. Section 144-A does not empower to the Joint Commissioner to give a direction to an Assessing Officer to complete the assessment in a particular manner. Directions to be exercised by the Joint Commissioner under Section 144(A) is merely intended to guide the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment and only such directions are binding on an Assessing Officer. Since directions contained in the impugned order passed by the Joint Commissioner was prejudicial to the petitioner and to complete the assessment in a particular manner, petitioner should have been called for hearing by the second respondent Joint Commissioner. As there is a violation of Section 144(A) of the Incom....