Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2024 (3) TMI 150

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted 14.03.2005 passed by respondent No.1, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (briefly 'the Act' hereinafter) seeking for condonation of delay in filing the return for Assessment year 2001-02 claiming refund of Rs. 1,89,283/-, has been rejected. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed the original income-tax return on 31.07.2001 for the assessment year 2001-02 declaring a business loss of Rs. 5,00,000/- on estimate basis. The said return was processed under Section 143 of the Act by respondent No.3. The petitioner had subsequently filed revised return on 10.06.2003 declaring loss of Rs. 7,99,934/-. Along with the return, the petitioner had also clai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... disclosed the rental income nor claimed refund of the tax deducted at source from such rental income. The TDS certificates had been issued to the applicant prior to the time available for filing the revised return u/s. 139(4) of the Act. In the circumstances, I am of the opinion that the refund claim of the applicant is supplementary in nature. It does not satisfy the essential condition for condoning the delay in filing the return as laid down in the Instructions issued by the CBDT in F.No.225/208/93-IT(A-II), dt:12.10.1993. In view of the above, the delay in filing the revised return beyond statutory time limit and after the original return had been processed is not condoned". 5. A plain reading of the aforesaid operative par....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oresaid circular, the Department in fact had relaxed certain conditions which were so enumerated in the Circular dated 12.10.1993 referred in the preceding paragraphs. The relaxed conditions in terms of the Circular dated 30.10.2003 for ready reference are being reproduced herein under: "(i) the refund has arisen as a result of excess tax deducted/collected at source and payments of advance tax under the provisions of Chapters XVIIB, XVIIBB and XVIIC, respectively and the amount of refund does not exceed Rs. 5,00,000/- for any one assessment year; (ii) the income of the assessee is not assessable in the hands of any other person under any of the provisions of the Act; (iii) no interest will be admissible on the be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r as Circular dated 30.10.2003 is concerned. Respondent No.1 has also not dealt with the issue whether Circular dated 30.10.2003 would had been applicable or not so far as the claim of the petitioner is concerned. 11. A plain reading of the Circular dated 30.10.2003 would give a clear indication that the authorities concerned vide the said Circular had relaxed and modified the conditions stipulated in the previous Circular dated 12.10.1993 both in respect of the upper limit so far as claim of refund amount is concerned and also as regards the aspect whether it was in the form of a supplementary additional claim or not. 12. In view of the fact that the Circular dated 30.10.2003 was already in force when the impugned order was passed, w....