9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 772 - AT - Income TaxRectification of mistake - Correction of a mistake crept in the computation statement of income - assessee by an inadvertent mistake state the cost of acquisition as ₹ 2 lakh in place of ₹ 20 lakhs - HELD THAT - In the present case, the assessee is not claiming any new/additional deduction. The prayer is to adopt the correct amount of Capital Gains, the particulars of which have already been furnished to and available with the Assessing Authority. Therefore, the decision rendered in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT 2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT does not apply. CBDT Circular No. 14(XL35) dated 1110411955 provides for responsible assessment that the Assessing Authority to have reasonable approach in completing an assessment, to grant lawful and eligible deduction to the assessee, even if it was not claimed by the assessee. Assessing Authority has to see that the Income of the assessee has been determined after allowing all the lawful outgoings and statutory deductions. The recent judgment in the case of Raghavan Nair v. ACIT 2018 (1) TMI 863 - KERALA HIGH COURT had held that it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to refrain from assessing an non-taxable income returned by the assessee on mistaken understanding. We are of the view that the assessee is entitled to the relief sought for in this appeal. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Correction of mistake in computation statement of income. Analysis: The appeal was against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s order regarding the correction of a mistake in the computation statement of income for the assessment year 2012-2013. The appellant, a NRI, had inadvertently overstated the long term capital gain by marking the cost of acquisition as ?2,00,000 instead of ?20,00,000. The CIT(A) rejected the appeal on the grounds that the mistake was not part of the assessment order, no revised return was filed, and it was not a legal issue. However, the Tribunal considered the case, emphasizing that the mistake was honest and the Assessing Authority should correct it, as per judicial precedents. The Tribunal highlighted that assessment proceedings are not adversarial and the Authority should be fair in determining tax liability. Referring to relevant case laws, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant was entitled to the relief sought, and the appeal was allowed. The Tribunal noted that the mistake was committed by the appellant, not the Assessing Authority, and a revised return could have been filed only if the mistake was noted before completion of assessment. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assessing Authority should correct any mistakes found in the computation filed by the assessee, as assessment proceedings are not adversarial. The Tribunal cited relevant case laws to support its decision, highlighting that the correction of an honest mistake should be allowed, irrespective of whether it benefits the assessee or the Revenue. The Tribunal also referred to a CBDT Circular emphasizing the need for a reasonable approach in completing assessments and granting lawful deductions to the assessee. Moreover, the Tribunal cited a judgment of the jurisdictional High Court emphasizing the duty of the Assessing Officer to refrain from assessing non-taxable income returned by the assessee due to a mistaken understanding. The High Court's observation highlighted the quasi-judicial nature of Assessing Officers' powers and their duty to act fairly and do justice to the assessees. Based on these considerations, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant was entitled to the relief sought in the appeal and allowed the appeal, ordering accordingly.
|
