High Court at Calcutta · Judgments and reasoned final orders
Kriti Securities Consultants Private Limited v. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 30(1), Kolkata & Ors.
WPO/236/2025 ·
Online portal rejection of ITR-6 return for AY 2023-24 due to PAN issue: Assessing Officer directed to grant personal hearing and pass a reasoned order on pending representations (dated 15.03.2022 to 13.11.2024) preferably within 4 weeks.
1. FACTS OF THE CASE
Kriti Securities Consultants Pvt. Ltd. complained that it was unable to file its income-tax return online in Form ITR-6 for AY 2023-24 because the e-filing portal was rejecting the return due to a PAN-status issue, and that its representations from 15.03.2022 through 13.11.2024 had not been disposed of.
2. DISCUSSION BY THE COURT
Since the representations remained undecided, the Single Judge held it prudent to direct the concerned Assessing Officer to take a decision after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a reasoned order preferably within four weeks.
3. JUDICIAL DECISION
Disposed of WPO/236/2025 directing the Assessing Officer to pass a reasoned order within four weeks after hearing the petitioner.
4. OUTCOME
Assessee - Assessing Officer directed to decide representations regarding ITR-6 portal rejection after granting hearing preferably within 4 weeks.
5. AKHB REVIEW POINT
AKHB analysis: where a corporate assessee's ITR-6 is blocked by a PAN-status mismatch on the e-filing portal, preserve written representations with screenshots and seek a time-bound direction to the jurisdictional AO.
Source and verification
2-page official High Court at Calcutta judgment PDF (20250519_WBCHCO0012712025.pdf).
Original PDF: 2 pages · SHA-256: 0c91392444c8a021cfe67bbb299a36485c5dd16b64af96f7236dd2ea1a8123d0
Supplied source-reviewed note retained; original bytes and identity validation checked in this release. Substantive re-review is not claimed for this record.
Applies return-filing administration under section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for AY 2023-24. Income-tax Act, 2025 equivalence is not verified.
Full primary judgment PDF read page-by-page and verified against the AKHB Google Drive repository. Comprehensive subsequent judicial treatment has not been independently verified.
AI disclosure and professional disclaimer
AI-assisted source review. Independent human approval is not represented.
General research only. Read the complete judgment and verify applicable law and subsequent treatment before reliance.