Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (9) TMI 1373

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sessee is that the typographical error which has happened while filing the e-return. Thus, this is a clear case of mistake apparent on record which is very well curable/rectifiable u/s. 154 - Thus both the assessing officer and the Ld. CIT(A) has not properly appreciated the provisions of law and acted arbitrarily against the simple and genuine case of typographical mistake. Lower Authorities ought to have considered the Form No. 16 issued by the School Authorities as well as the bank statements provided by the assessee, to show her salary income from the teaching profession. However none of the above records have been considered by the lower authorities and arbitrarily derived the assessee to come for the second stage of appeal before u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Rs. 4,97,370/-. The said return was processed u/s. 143(1) on 04.10.2013 by Centralized Processing Centre, Bengaluru and demanded a tax of Rs. 16,52,698/- on the mistakenly returned income of Rs. 54,97,370/-. 3.Aggrieved against the same, the assessee filed a revised return on 06.01.2015 by e-filing correcting the typographical error and offering the total income of Rs. 4,97,370/-. The above return was declared Invalid with E-filing Acknowledged Number 459041810060115. Therefore the assessee filed a rectification petition u/s. 154 on 16.10.2018 submitting the typographical error, erupt in the original return of income and produced Form No. 16 claiming that her income from salary and the total income assessable as Rs. 4,97,370/-. The Ld .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... we take the appeal of the assessee for adjudication on merit. 6. Ld. Counsel Mr. Mehul J. Ranpura appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee is engaged in the noble profession of school teacher and by typo mistake the return was filed for an amount of Rs. 54,97,370/- as against the total income of Rs. 4,97,370/-. When the assessee received 143(1) intimation with an huge demand of Rs. 16,52,298/-. The assessee filed a Revised Return of income on 06.01.2015 and acknowledgement of the return was sent to CPC Centre for E-verification through ordinary post within prescribed time limit of 120 days. However due to some reasons, the same was not received by CPC Centre, the Revised Return was held be invalid. It is thereafter the ass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urn of income. Therefore the entire addition made is to be deleted and thereby allow the appeal of the assessee. 7. Per contra the ld. D.R. Shri B.D. Gupta appearing for the Revenue fairly admitted it is an apparent mistake on record which is rectifiable u/s. 154 of the Act. Therefore the same may be taken on record and appropriate order be passed by the Tribunal. 8. We have heard both parties and perused the materials available on record including the Paper Book filed by the assessee. It is most unfortunate case of the assessee that while e-filing the original Return of Income by mistake the gross total income is typed as Rs. 55,40,001/- and after paying taxes of Rs. 30,629/-. When this return was processed u/s. 143(1) and a demand o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the assessee has not made any new claim or deduction which require to file Revised Return. The grievance of the assessee is that the typographical error which has happened while filing the e-return. Thus, this is a clear case of mistake apparent on record which is very well curable/rectifiable u/s. 154 of the Act. Thus both the assessing officer and the Ld. CIT(A) has not properly appreciated the provisions of law and acted arbitrarily against the simple and genuine case of typographical mistake. The Lower Authorities ought to have considered the Form No. 16 issued by the School Authorities as well as the bank statements provided by the assessee, to show her salary income from the teaching profession. However none of the above records have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates