MADHU NADUVATH MANA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER,

WP(C)/8561/2019

AI Insights

The case involves Madhu Naduvath Mana, a practicing lawyer and assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961, who filed a writ petition against the Income Tax Officer and the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax. The dispute arose from the rejection of the petitioner's revised return and subsequent rectification request for the assessment year 2010-11, where the petitioner claimed depreciation that was not included in the schedule of the original return. The court found that the revised return should have been entertained and directed the acceptance of the revised return, emphasizing the need for an appropriate order to be passed after hearing the petitioner.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 754805 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM
• Assessee Lawyers: A KUMAR; AJAY ANAND; G MINI; P J ANILKUMAR; P S SREE PRASAD
• Keywords: Depreciation claim; Income Tax; Rectification; Revised return; Revision petition
• Section: 264

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE THURSDAY ,THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1940 WP(C).No. 8561 of 2019 PETITIONER/S: MADHU NADUVATH MANA 1-D, ROYAL NEST INFORT, CHINMAYA ROAD, CHINMAYA ROAD IN FORT, TRIPUNITHURA, KERALA-682301. BY ADVS. SRI.A.KUMAR SRI.AJAY V.ANAND SMTG.MINI(1748) SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR SRI.P.S.SREE PRASAD RESPONDENT/S: 1 INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 1(3), KOCHI-682018. 2 PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I S PRESS RD, KOCHI-682018. BY ADV.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM SC IT THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 8561 of 2019 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a practicing lawyer and an assessee under the Income Tax Act, 1961. For the assessment year 2010-11, the petitioner filed e-returns of 2010. In the return filed, the petitioner claimed a depreciation of Rs.1,11,338/-. However, in the schedule, it was not mentioned. Thereafter, the petitioner filed revised return within time ie; on 31.03.2011, that was rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner, filed rectification on 30.03.2012 and the rectification was rejected on 12.04.2012. 2. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a revision. There was a long delay in filing the revision. It was for the reason that the petitioner was not aware of the orders passed on rectification. The order of rectification, in fact, was uploaded in the WP(C).No. 8561 of 2019 3 website, but the hard copy was not communicated to the petitioner. The revision was also rejected, stating that there is no scope for entertaining the revision under Section 264 of the IT Act. The petitioner's claim for depreciation is reflected in the return. The only defect that was existed is with regard to the non-inclusion in the schedule. 3. In such circumstance, I am of the view that revised return ought to have been entertained. There is no scope for, in fact, filing a revision as rightly pointed out by the Commissioner. Nevertheless, what assumes importance is that in the factor of claim made by the petitioner in regard to depreciation. Therefore, I am of the view that revised return shall be accepted and appropriate order shall be passed, taking note of the claim for depreciation made by WP(C).No. 8561 of 2019 4 the petitioner, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till the revised order is passed, any demand based on the return shall not be enforced. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE SB/21/03/2019 JUDGE WP(C).No. 8561 of 2019 5 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISED E-RETURN EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.12.2011 (RELEVANT PAGES) EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION REQUEST EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFIED ITR EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DEMAND NOTICE EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE INCOME TAX PORTAL SHOWING THE STATUS OF THE RECTIFICATION EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN REVISION PETITION EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.10.2018 RESPONDENTS EXTS: NIL // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE "