9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 628 - AT - Income TaxRectification u/s 154 - computation of fringe benefits and tax thereon - assessee filed the return disclosing income of ₹ 3,24,970/- by showing the value of fringe benefits of ₹ 2,28,160/- - HELD THAT - We are of the considered view that if any error has been tracked in filing the details of fringe benefits the same deserve rectification after due verification. Merely because the return was filed online would not allow the revenue to take the benefit of any factual error in the return so filed. In the interest of justice and fair play we restore the issue to the files of the AO. AO is directed to verify the details and rectify the mistake, if any, as per provisions of the law. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Issues:
1. Rectification of error in computation of fringe benefits for assessment year 2006-07. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the order of the CIT(A)-28, New Delhi for the assessment year 2006-07, regarding the demand of ?3,12,530 on account of fringe benefit tax. The assessee disputed the FBT liability on total expenses of ?9,50,288 and sought deletion of the demand. The application under section 154 of the Act for rectification was rejected by the Assessing Officer (AO). The return disclosed income of ?3,24,970 with fringe benefits valued at ?2,28,160. The computation showed errors in the values for each quarter, leading to the total of ?9,50,288. The AO denied the rectification application citing that online-filed ITR cannot be rectified under section 154. Upon review, the Tribunal found that rectification should be allowed if errors are identified in the details of fringe benefits, regardless of the online filing method. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of rectification for factual errors in the return. In the interest of justice, the issue was remanded back to the AO for verification and rectification as per legal provisions. Consequently, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. The decision was announced in the presence of both representatives on 15.12.2021.
|
