2023 (8) TMI 1370

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....M APPL. 42805/2023 [Application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief] 2. This writ petition concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23. 3. The petitioner/assessee filed its Return of Income [ROI] on 28.10.2022. The ROI disclosed Rs. 81,66,28,38,880/ as the petitioner's income. In computing the income, the petitioner took into consideration the relevant Income Computation and Disclosure Standards [ICDS] issued under Section 145(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, "the Act"]. 4. The record shows that the petitioner received an intimation via email dated 29.05.2023 to the effect that the respondents/revenue were seeking clarification regarding the information contained in the return filed for AY 2022-23. The clarif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly an "increase in profit" without accounting for the corresponding "decrease in profit". Consequently, the additions, amounting to Rs. 63,69,25,11,841/- and Rs. 59,14,49,73,823/-, cumulatively, had been made by taking into account the gross increase in profit instead of the net increase in profit. 5.2 Furthermore, besides the addition mentioned above, it is the petitioner's case that credit for prepaid taxes, to the extent of Rs. 1,59,88,058/-, had not been allowed. 6. In sum, the petitioner avers that an upward adjustment of Rs. 1,22,83,74,85,664/- by the AO to its income has resulted in a demand amounting to Rs. 35,72,60,44,590/-, inclusive of interest levied under Section 234B/C of the Act. 7. Mr Rohit Jain, learned counsel, who appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was operable, Mr Gupta says that he will have to obtain instructions concerning that aspect of the matter. 10. Furthermore, Mr Gupta also raises the issue concerning the viability of this writ action. In this regard, Mr Gupta draws our attention to the Power of Attorney [PoA], which is appended on page 440 of the case file. 10.1 Mr Gupta says that in terms of PoA, the person instituting the writ petition was required to take prior approval of the person(s) who had executed the PoA. 11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, what emerges is that the petitioner could not respond to the email dated 29.05.2023. Since Mr Gupta has no instructions on whether the tab on the designated e-filing portal was operable, this aspect attain....