GUTHARAMAMOHANARAO KRISHNAKISHOR Vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has sought for setting aside of the assessment order at Annexure-A dtd. 9/12/2019 passed by respondent No.2 and the consequent notice of demand at Annexure-A1. The petitioner has also sought for setting aside of the order dtd. 8/3/2022 passed under Sec. 264 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') at Annexure-B.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the notice is issued preceding the assessment order and has been issued to a wrong email-ID communications were sent to the email-ID of the Consultant, who has not kept the petitioner intimated. Accordingly, it is submitted that the Authority while passing the assessment order has treated that the petitioner is disentitled for exemption under Sec. 10(37) of the Act and added Rs.40,00,000.00 to the returned income for the year 2017-18. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that if an opportunity is granted, they would be in a position to substantiate that the addition of Rs.40,00,000.00 is in fact agricultural income. It is further submitted that the findings by the Revisional Authority under Sec. 264 of the Act, are also required to be interfered with while taking a broader look at the matter and affording a fresh opportunity to the petitioner to substantiate his case in light of the benefit conferred by way of exemption under Sec. 10(37) of the Act.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would point out that the Revisional Authority has recorded correct findings and no case as such is made out for interference. But however, he submits that the aspect of the violation of the principles of natural justice is a matter left for a Court to be considered appropriately.