2022 (3) TMI 215 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 43B denied - Non entertaining revised claim made by the assessee - revised claim of the assessee qua deduction claimed under Section 43B has been rejected by learned first appellate authority simply due to lack of supporting evidences - HELD THAT - As it is fairly well settled, though, before the Assessing Officer, the Assessee can make a revised claim only through a revised return of income filed under Section 139(5) however, there is no such restriction before the appellate authority. Therefore, the revised claim made by the assessee can be entertained by the appellate authority, subject to, factual verification. In the facts of the present appeal, revised claim of the assessee qua deduction claimed under Section 43B of the Act has been rejected by learned first appellate authority simply due to lack of supporting evidences. Without entering into the controversy, whether the assessee has filed the supporting evidences qua its revised claim of deduction under Section 43B of the Act, we are inclined to restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining the claim of deduction made by the assessee under Section 43B of the Act in the revised computation of income based on the evidences available on record. Thus liberty is granted to the assessee to furnish any other evidence before the Assessing Officer in support of its revised claim of deduction under Section 43B of the Act. It is made clear, the Assessing Officer has to decide the revised claim of the assessee strictly in accordance with the evidences filed by the assessee. Assessee appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Issues involved:
1. Disallowance under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act
2. Correctness of deduction claimed by the appellant
3. Evidence submitted by the appellant for deduction claim
4. Ignoring revised computation of income by Assessing Officer
5. Levying interest under section 234C of the Act

Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance under Section 43B of the Income-tax Act
The appellant contested the disallowance under Section 43B made by the Assessing Officer, claiming it was an inadvertent error. The appellant filed a revised computation of income during assessment proceedings to rectify the disallowance. However, the Assessing Officer ignored this revision and computed the income based on the original return. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the disallowance, stating the appellant failed to provide valid evidence for the revised claim. The Tribunal noted the appellant's revised claim and decided to send the issue back to the Assessing Officer for re-examination, emphasizing the need for factual verification.

Issue 2: Correctness of deduction claimed by the appellant
The appellant revised the deduction claimed under Section 43B in the computation of income, asserting it was a bona fide mistake. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected this claim due to lack of supporting evidence. The Tribunal acknowledged the revised claim and directed the Assessing Officer to reevaluate it based on the evidence submitted by the appellant, granting liberty to provide additional evidence if needed.

Issue 3: Evidence submitted by the appellant for deduction claim
The appellant argued that all evidence supporting the revised deduction claim was submitted during assessment proceedings and before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal considered this argument and decided to send the issue back to the Assessing Officer for a thorough examination of the evidence provided by the appellant.

Issue 4: Ignoring revised computation of income by Assessing Officer
The Tribunal criticized the Assessing Officer for disregarding the appellant's revised computation of income and emphasized the importance of considering all relevant submissions during the assessment process. The Tribunal's decision to remand the issue back to the Assessing Officer aimed to rectify this oversight and ensure a fair evaluation of the appellant's claims.

Issue 5: Levying interest under section 234C of the Act
The appellant challenged the levy of interest under section 234C of the Act. However, the Tribunal did not adjudicate on this issue, deeming it consequential and not requiring further examination at that stage.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, remanding the issues related to the deduction claim under Section 43B back to the Assessing Officer for reevaluation based on the evidence provided by the appellant. The decision aimed to ensure a fair assessment process and proper consideration of the appellant's claims.

← Previous Next →