9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 1198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Central Processing Centre (CPC), Bangalore. The grounds raised by the assessee are reproduced as under: 1. That the Ld. AO erred in taxing the same income of assessee twice, once at special rate of 15% under Double Taxation Treaty between UK and India as per Article 13 of the said treaty and again as normal business income at the rate of 40% being the rate applicable to foreign companies. 2. That Ld. AO erred in rejecting the request of the assessee u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act to rectify the said order. 3. That it is gross injustice to the assessee who is being forced to pay tax twice on the same income resulting in aggregate tax rate of 55% on the income. 2. Both parties have been heard through Video Conferencing facility. The L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he business (page 55 of the paperbook) but under the schedule "SI" shown the nil income. The assessee was again communicated on 23/06/2015 regarding defects in the return of income filed as evident from the activity reported on page 40 of the paper-book. (iv) In view of no response from the assessee, the return which was considered as defective was taken up for processing on 6/03/2016 (activity reported on page 40 of the paper-book). In view of same income offered by the assessee at two places in the return of income, the Assessing Officer at CPC processed the return of income vide intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 10/03/2016 and computed tax liability on the income declared under the head profit and gains of business and p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d tax of Rs. 4,08,358/- along with the interest. The assessee filed a copy of computation of total income and tax thereon on page 2 of the paper-book. The learned Counsel submitted that income of the assessee has been taxed twice. He further submitted that it is the duty of the income tax authorities to assess the correct income. He referred to CBDT Circular No.14 (XL-35) dated 11th April 1955, wherein the Assessing Officers were directed not to take advantage of assessee's ignorance or mistake. The learned Counsel also submitted that time limit for filing revised return had already expired and therefore the assessee is unable to comply with the direction of the Learned CIT(A) for filing the revised return. 5. The Learned DR, on the other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5, we find that no details in respect of assets and liabilities and profit and loss accounts are filed except gross and net receipts of Rs. 26,43,090/-. In the part A-TI (computation of income), the assessee declared [in the row 2(i)] profit and gains from business other than speculative business at Rs. 26,43,090/-. The assessee also declared income chargeable to special rates as per schedule 'SI' at Rs. 26,43,090/-. The Learned Counsel has claimed before us that income of the assessee was liable under section 44D has been but in the return of income filed on 30/03/2015 in the row 34(vi) (on page 58 of the paper-book) the income again section 44D reported as nil. Thus, definitely, return of income has been filed in negligent and casual man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
