2025 (10) TMI 98

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the Respondent No. 1, rejecting the Petitioner's declaration made under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 ('IDS'). The Petitioner also challenges the notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('IT Act') dated 31st March 2021 issued for A.Y.2017-18, the consequent assessment order dated 29th March 2022 passed under Section 147 read with section 144B of the IT Act, the Notice of Demand dated 29th March 2022 issued under Section 156 of the IT Act, and the Show Cause Notice dated 29th March 2022 under Section 270A of the IT Act. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Petitioner had not filed its Return of Income for the A.Y. 2015-16 and A.Y. 2016-17. Therefore, in order to avail the benefit of the IDS, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 15th March 2021 passed under Section 187(3) of the FA Act, Respondent No. 1 held that the Petitioner's application filed under the IDS was invalid and deemed it never to have been filed. 6. Upon such rejection, Respondent No. 2, based on the information about the undisclosed income declared by the Petitioner under the IDS, issued a notice under Section 148 of the IT Act on 31st March 2021, reopening the assessment for the A.Y. 2017-18. This culminated into an assessment order under Section 147 read with section 144B of the IT Act dated 29th March 2022, determining Petitioner's total income at Rs. 6,88,89,737/- for A.Y. 2017-18, by making an addition of Rs. 5,18,28,087/- being the income declared under the IDS by the Petitioner which go....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the Petitioner is correct when he contends that he would be entitled for the credit of advance tax paid by him for the aforesaid two assessment years as set out by us earlier. In the affidavit, Mr. Sharma also pointed out to us that the shortfall of tax is Rs. 54,99,996/-, and since credit has to be given for the advance tax of Rs. 55,00,000/- paid by the Petitioner, there would obviously be no shortfall. Mr. Sharma, therefore, submitted that appropriate directions be passed by this court. 9. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and also perused the papers and proceedings in the above Writ Petition. It is not in dispute that the total tax demand raised by the Income Tax Department under the IDS was Rs. 2,33,22,640/-. Afte....