TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 150
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s are connected, hence the same are heard together and being disposed off by this common order. 3. Brief facts of the case are, assessee is a public sector limited listed company engaged in the business of offering global IT solutions. Assessee filed its return of income for AY 2021-22 declaring an income of Rs. 99,75,29,520/- under normal provisions and claimed a refund of Rs. 9,40,68,840/-. A notice dated 04.07.2022 was issued to the assessee proposing adjustment in terms of First Proviso to section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') and the assessee filed its response. The intimation order passed u/s 143(1) dated 17.10.2022 was passed by making an adjustment relating to disallowance u/s 80M and addition of GST....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in sub-clauses (i) to (vi) thereto. He submitted that in the present case, the adjustments under dispute, being (i) disallowance of deduction claimed under section 80M; and (ii) addition of GST refund on account of mis-match in ITR vis-a-vis TAR, it is respectfully submitted, do not fall within any of the sub-clause/permissible adjustments specified under section 143(1)(a) of the Act as demonstrated under: Error/condition specified in sub-clauses to section 143(1)(a) Disallowance u/s 80M Addition for GST refund (i) Arithmetical errors Adjustment not on account of arithmetical error Adjustment not on account of arithmetical error (ii) Incorrect claim apparent from the information furnished in the return No incorrect ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ionale behind making such adjustment, let alone specifying the clause under which such adjustment has been made; (b) The intimation has been issued without considering the reply dated 05.07.2022 filed the appellant in response to the draft intimation issued under section 143(1)(a) which is in violation of the provisions of section 143(1) as well as principles of natural justice and fair play; (c) The adjustments, even otherwise, have been made on debatable issues which cannot, by any stretch of argument, be subject matter of adjustment under section 143(1)(a) of the Act inasmuch as if debatable issue were treated to be covered by section 143(1)(a), the same would be contrary to the scheme of the Act. It is trite l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l placed on record. We observe that intimation u/s 143(1) was passed by proposing two disallowances relating to claim of deduction u/s 80M and mis-match of refund of GST as reported in tax audit report. We observe that assessee has already filed an objection against the above proposed disallowances. However, AO has not considered the same nor given any opportunity to the assessee before passing the above intimation order. Further we observe that the proposed additions are not falling in any of the clauses mentioned u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act. Therefore, proposing any addition which is outside the provisions of section 143(1)(a) is bad in law and outside the jurisdiction of provisions of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. It is settled position of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... open to the Income-tax Officer, in such a case, was to require the assessee to furnish proof in which case he would have to issue notice under section 143(2). Adjustment could be made only if there was information available in such return, that prima facie a claim or allowance was inadmissible. With regard to the third adjustment, the assessee had filed along with the return details of statutory dues as on March 31, 1989. The assessee had also filed details of payments made thereafter from April 1, 1989, till the date of filing of the return on December 28, 1989. The assessee had given details of payments made to the provident fund trust and also the sales tax dues in the form of a chart. The total amount worked out to Rs. 16,69,470/-. The....