TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1610
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 05.11.2024 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2011- 12 in the proceeding under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2011-12 on 30.07.2011 declaring income of Rs. 2,46,340/-. The return of income was processed by the CPC on 28.01.2012. While processing, no variation in the income as declared by the assessee was made. However, the status of the assessee, which was declared as "any other AOP" in the return, was changed to "LLP" in the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act, which resulted in additional tax liability to the assessee. 3. Aggrieved with the intimation order, the assessee had f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the fact that, the appellant trust is the only trust declared by Late Mr. Bharatbhai Mahasukhlal Doshi by will and such trust is only trust so declared by him and the appellant trust was covered by Clause (ii) of the Proviso to Sub Section 1 of Sec. 164 of the Act and therefore was not liable to be taxed on the relevant income of the trust at the maximum marginal rate as has been charged by the Ld. DDIT,CPC and Ld. AddI./JCIT(A)-11, Delhi has erred in law and on facts in not considering & upholding such Intimation/ order, 4. The Ld. DDIT, CPC has erred in law and on facts in ignoring the provisions of Clause (ii) to 1st Proviso to Sec. 164(1), which provides that, (ii) the relevant income or part of the income receivable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-11. Delhi has erred in law and on facts in not considering the same & upholding such Intimation/ order, 6. The Ld. DDIT, CPC has erred in law and on facts in raising the demand of tax of Rs. 76,119, demand of interest u/s. 234B of Rs. 5,270 and interest of Rs. 1,950 making total interest of Rs. 7,220 se charged and thereby raising total demand of Rs. 83,339 may kindly be quashed and refund of Rs. 14,510 net after tax payable shown in the return/ computation may kindly be ordered to be granted along with interest u/s. 244 of the Act and thereby Demand raised of Rs. 59,937 under Identification No. 2012201137002662134T and the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)- 11, Delhi have erred in law and on facts in upholding the same which m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee being a Trust, was not conversant with the Income Tax proceedings and the trustees were not conversant with the Income Tax portal. Further, the demand raised while processing the return was also not communicated to the assessee and no notice was ever received for payment of this demand. It was only in the year 2023 that the assessee came to know about the outstanding demand for the A.Y. 2011-12 and, thereafter, had filed an application under Section 154 of the Act on 05.05.2023 vide e-mail. Thereafter, an appeal against the intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act was also filed on 14.10.2023. The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) had, however, dismissed the appeal of the assessee for the reason that there was delay of 4209 days in filing the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....passed on 28.01.2012 is available for AY 2011-12 and shared with the assessee. Copy of said intimation is attached for kind perusal (Password-aaaab4635p18092001). There is no tab or details available from which it could be ascertained that this intimation order was duly served on E-mail on a particular date. But it is a general practice that all the communication was duly served through E-mail and shared through E-proceeding/Assessee's Communication on E-filling Portal. 3. Further, details of communication under communication reference number CPC/1112/15/1110643417 is available under this tab and same is also attached for kind reference. 7.1 It is apparent from the above report that the Department is not in a position to asc....