9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 80X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th ld DR to the effect that there is violation of provisions of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules. The second contention raised by the ld DR is that such type of typographical error can be rectified under section 154 of the Act. We note that clause (a) of section 246(1) provides that assessee can file appeal against the order passed by assessing officer under section 143(1) of the Act before CIT(A). The assessee can object the arithmetical adjustments made by the assessing officer under section 143(1) of the Act by filing an appeal before ld CIT(A). Based on this factual position, as narrated above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A). - Decided against revenue. - ITA No.153/SRT/2020 - - - Dated:- 31-1-2022 - Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . (i) (ii), if CIT(A) has verified certain other records/details etc. for grant of questioned relief, whether he has erred in not following provision of Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules, 1962. (iv) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in Law, the Ld.CIT(A), Surat ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer i.e. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1 Surat may be set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer's i.e DCIT,CPC, Bengaluru order may be restored. (v) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the appellant craves its right to add, alter, amend, deleted, any of the ground or grounds of appeal. 3. Brief facts qua the issue are that the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how the amount of ₹ 41,09,82,100/- which had already been added back has within it the provision for ex-gratia payments of ₹ 4,50,00,000/- included. The CIT(A) in his order has said that he has examined records and cross checked the audit report, without providing an opportunity to the assessing officer to verify total of ₹ 41,09,82,100/- which is shown to have added back. That is, ld CIT(A) did not provide an opportunity to examine the fact that ₹ 4,50,00,000/-, as Provision for ex-gratia payment is included in the amount of ₹ 41,09,82,100/-. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not following provision of Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The learned DR also argued that such type of mistakes can be corr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO since the matter involves high pitched assessments, calling for high priority/expeditions disposal. I have decided not to wait further for the report, instead, I have proceeded to do examination of records cross check with the audit report. I find that in the ITR, the assessee has made following adjustments to net profit in arriving of total income. Net profit as per ITR (ITD) Schedule BP Col. 1 12,50,00,000 Add back sch. BP col. No. 23 41,09,82,100 1 Provision ₹ 17,39,80,824/- 2 Loss on sale of securities ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that such type of typographical error can be rectified under section 154 of the Act. We note that clause (a) of section 246(1) provides that assessee can file appeal against the order passed by assessing officer under section 143(1) of the Act before CIT(A). The assessee can object the arithmetical adjustments made by the assessing officer under section 143(1) of the Act by filing an appeal before ld CIT(A). 9. Based on this factual position, as narrated above, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld. CIT(A). That being so, we decline to interfere in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), his order on this issue is hereby accepted and grounds of appeal raised by Revenue are dismissed. 10. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
