HC quashes I-T notice issued to GIDC to pay Rs 18.92 cr

PANJIM: The High Court of Bombay at Goa has quashed and set aside notice issued by the Income Tax Office, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi asking the Goa Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) to pay demand of over Rs 18.92 crore for the Assessment Year 2018-19 and to do reassessment of tax.

The GIDC by a writ petition had challenged the notice of demand under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated August 17, 2021 issued by the Income Tax Office, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, seeking a demand of Rs 18,92,96,072, for the Assessment Year 2018-19.

The notice contemplated that if the amount of the tax was not paid within 30 days from the date of service of the notice, the petitioner would be liable to pay interest on the said amount towards penalty failing which action would be taken in accordance with Sections 222 to 227, 229 and 232 of the Act. 

The GIDC contested that it had filed return of income for 2018-19, declaring gross income to the tune of Rs 37,22,49,259. As per the I-T returns, the net income was nil. The case was selected for scrutiny under the Computer Assisted Scrutiny Selection (CASS). 

But the Income Tax Office issued a show cause notice to the petitioner stating that their assessment could not be considered as a charitable trust as defined under Section 2(15) of the Act and instead the income was computed under the head “income from business”. 

After hearing both the parties, the Division Bench comprising Justices Sadhana Jadhav and Revati Mohite Dere quashed and set aside the matter and remanded it to the Income Tax Office to complete the assessment proceedings by following due procedure as contemplated by Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 

The respondent has been asked to give 15 days advance notice before the date of hearing through video-conferencing and to complete assessment proceedings within three months from the date of receipt of this order or from the date on which the order is uploaded, whichever is earlier. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed off.

Share This Article