9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dingly, the mistake pointed out by the assessee in the applications under section 154 was required to be verified by the Assessing Officer from the bank account as well as the accounts maintained by the assessee. Prima facie it appears that for both the assessment years, the gross receipt of the assessee were not more than Rs. 32,000/- or Rs. 35,000/- and hence, the total income mentioned in the return of income and finally assess to tax at Rs. 2647740/- and Rs. 2779250/-, respectively for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 is not the real income of the assessee. Since neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) has verified the correct facts about the wrong income offered to tax by the assessee due to typographical mistake or technical mistake while filing the return of income therefore, the matter for both the assessment years are set aside to the record of the Assessing Officer for reconsideration of the same after a proper enquiry and verification of the record to find out the correct facts about the income of the assessee for these two assessment years and then assess the correct income of the assessee. - ITA No.12/VNS/2022 And ITA No.13/VNS/2022 - - - Dated:- 4-8-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner. Thereafter the Assessing Officer has rejected the application filed under section 154 of the Act, vide order dated 29th January, 2020 for both the years. The assessee filed appeals before the CIT(A) against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154 of the Act. The CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee on the ground that there was no mistake in the processing of the return under section 143(1)(a) and therefore, there is no infirmity in the order of the Assessing Officer dated 29th January, 2020 passed under section 154 of the Act. 3. Before the Tribunal, the learned AR of the assessee has submitted that at the time of filing of return of income for those two assessment years, the assessee declared the income at Rs. 26,477/- and Rs. 27,792/-, respectively. However, for the reasons not known to the assessee, this amount has been taken by the computer as well as by CPC at Rs. 26,47,737/- and Rs. 27,79,249/-, respectively. It was only a typographical mistake or may be a technical error due to which the total income declared by the assessee was enhanced by 10 times. After the return of income were processed by CPC under section 143(1)(a), th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same submission is being made for both assessment years. 2. That the assessee is a registered society which came into existence on 11.06.2004 and has been granted registration under Society Registration Act on 11.08.2009 and later on this registration renewed on 11.08.2009 for five years. 3. That the assessee has submitted his return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014-15 on 28.03.2015 4. That the computer operator who submitted the return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 at Rs. 2677 and for A.Y. 201-15 for Rs. 27,792/- and for the reason not know to the assessee this amount has been taken by the computer as well as by CPC at Rs. 26,47,737/- and Rs. 27,79,249/- respectively. That on these two figures the computation u/s 143(1)(a) has been passed for both the year and huge demand has been created. 5. That the assessee submitted the application u/s 154 of the IT Act for A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014-15 on 28.02.2018 and also submitted a written argument u/s 154 on 04.09.2019. The Ld. Assessing officer communicated the assessee verbally that he will not entertain the application u/s 154 as it has no mistake apparent on record, there was no written order passed by him. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of the salary etc. 12. That it is important to mention that as per provision of Section 12A(1) in the case of the society, if the gross receipt is more that taxable income, the society will have to be get their account audited by the C.A. it is surprising that the income is taken at an amount of more than Rs. 20Lacs without any audit report. 13.That on the date of hearing of Revision petition Pr. CIT, Allahabad on 26.02.2020 the petitioner/appellant has withdrawn his revision petition for both the year i.e. AY 2013-14 2014-15 and preferred appeal before your honour. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in para 6.2 to 6.4 as under:- 6.2 DECISION:- I have perused the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, submission of the appellant, order u/s 154 and other material available on record. On perusal of the different rows of the return of income in regard to gross total income (Row 5 of Part B-T-1) and amount applied to charitable purposes in India during the previous year (Row 6 of Part B-T-1) it is noted that the appellant had filled up the same amount of Rs. 26,47,737/-at both places which cannot be a typo error. It at all, it is omission or commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e could not revised its return of income within the period prescribed, it does not mean that there is no remedy for such a mistake leading to incorrect assessment. Even otherwise, if assessee has offered an income to tax by mistake or due to technical mal functioning of computer system, the appellate authority has the jurisdiction to rectify such mistake and particularly to avoid the assessment of the income which is not the real income of the assessee. Accordingly, the mistake pointed out by the assessee in the applications under section 154 was required to be verified by the Assessing Officer from the bank account as well as the accounts maintained by the assessee. Prima facie it appears that for both the assessment years, the gross receipt of the assessee were not more than Rs. 32,000/- or Rs. 35,000/- and hence, the total income mentioned in the return of income and finally assess to tax at Rs. 2647740/- and Rs. 2779250/-, respectively for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 is not the real income of the assessee. Since neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) has verified the correct facts about the wrong income offered to tax by the assessee due to typographical mist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
