2014 (4) TMI 1003 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification of order u/s 154 - doctrine of merger - merger of an order with order in appeal - Disallowance out of welfare expenses Held that - The addition of Rs. 23,064/- was mentioned at 3 different places in the assessment order - Section 154(1A) specifically provides that any matter which has not been considered and decided in any proceedings by way of appeal or revision filed against an order referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 154 of the Act may be amended by the authority passing such an order in exercise of its power under sub-section (1) of Section 154 of the Act - the authority passing an order may amend that part of the order which has not been considered and decided in any proceeding by way of appeal or revision against order - the matter of ad-hoc disallowance out of sundry expenses was considered and decided by CIT(A) in appellate proceedings the AO had erred in framing revision order passed u/s 154 Decided in favour of Assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Rectification of disallowance out of welfare expenditure under Section 154 of the Act.
2. Invocation of Section 154 on a debatable matter.
3. Consideration of submissions and information by lower authorities.
4. Finality of orders and applicability of Section 154(1A).

Issue 1: Rectification of disallowance out of welfare expenditure under Section 154 of the Act:
The appeal was filed by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A) for A.Y. 2003-04. The Assessee, a Co. Op. Society, provided treatment and waste disposal services. The A.O. made a disallowance of 15% of administrative and welfare expenses, but later realized a calculation error and rectified it under Section 154 of the Act. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, stating that the mistake was arithmetical and should have been raised during the CIT appeal. The Assessee contended that the rectification was improper as the A.O.'s decision had attained finality. The Tribunal held that since the matter was already considered and decided by CIT(A), the A.O. erred in rectifying the order under Section 154.

Issue 2: Invocation of Section 154 on a debatable matter:
The Assessee argued that the matter of disallowance was debatable and the lower authorities exceeded their jurisdiction by invoking Section 154. The A.O. had made a further disallowance despite the Assessee's initial disallowance and CIT(A) overturning the A.O.'s decision. The Tribunal noted that the matter was already decided by CIT(A), making it non-debatable. Therefore, the A.O.'s action under Section 154 was deemed incorrect.

Issue 3: Consideration of submissions and information by lower authorities:
The Assessee contended that the lower authorities did not properly consider the submissions and explanations provided. The A.O. had made a net disallowance after the Assessee's initial disallowance, which was later deleted by CIT(A). The Tribunal observed that CIT(A) had considered the facts and directed the A.O. to delete the addition, indicating due consideration of the Assessee's submissions.

Issue 4: Finality of orders and applicability of Section 154(1A):
The Assessee argued that the order of CIT(A) had attained finality as the Revenue did not challenge it before the Tribunal. The Tribunal referred to Section 154(1A), which allows the amendment of matters not considered in appeal or revision. Since the matter of disallowance was already decided by CIT(A), the A.O.'s revision order under Section 154 was deemed incorrect. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the Assessee's appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the Assessee's appeal, emphasizing that the A.O. erred in rectifying the order under Section 154 as the matter had already been considered and decided by CIT(A). The Tribunal upheld the principle of finality of orders and the correct application of Section 154(1A) in this context.