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

2024 (6) TMI 877

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ordance with law based on the correct income. We get strength to support of our wherein on the similar circumstances the co ordinate bench of Mumbai has considered the plea of the assessee. Out of the judgment so relied upon by the assessee we find that on the similar circumstances as that of the assessee was in the case of Shri Sumanchandra G. Mehta [ 2013 (12) TMI 358 - ITAT MUMBAI] Thus we direct the AO to decide the application of the assessee filed u/s.154 after making necessary relief and decide the issue of charging the correct income in the hands of the assessee. In terms of these observations, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM And Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, AM For the A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e rectified shall be against the principle of Article 265 of the Constitution of India where no tax can be retained without authority of law? 5. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) is justified in not appreciating that it is a case of filing of corrected return rather a case of revised return? 6. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter all or any of grounds of appeal and relief claimed before or at the time of hearing. 3. The fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee is a Partner of M/s. Mahaveer Oil Industries, Niwai District Tonk. Assessee received interest of Rs. 1,29,100/- and remuneration of Rs. 84,000/- totaling to Rs. 2,13,100/- from the Partnership Firm M/s. Maha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the Act for rectification of mistake in order dated 11.6.2012. Income Tax Officer, Tonk rejected the rectification application vide its order dated 22/4/2014. 4. Aggrieved from the said action of the Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Apropos to the grounds so raised the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is reiterated here in below:- Decision Assessee submission has been considered carefully. In this case for AY 2011-12 due date for filing return u/s 139(1) was 31 July 2011, whereas assessee has filed return on 10.02.2012 of Rs. 1409550/-. Furthermore, assessee has also sent ITR V of return filed on 10.02.2012 to CPC for verification, which CPC has correctly processed as held clearly by the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ACIT in ITA No. 512/Kol/2015 dated 09.12.2015 Shrikant Real Estates (P) Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 4304/Mum/2012 dated 19th October, 2012 Sumanchandra G. Mehta vs. ITO in ITA Nos. 564/Mum/2012 565/Mum/2012 dated 24th Jan, 2013 6. The ld. AR of the assessee in addition to the above written submission, the ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the tax should be charged correctly in the hands of the assessee. The ld. JAO has not made any inquiry as to the factual error available on record and therefore, the assessee should be charged on the correct income and accordingly, the tax is required to be levied. To support his contention he has relied upon the various case laws as cited here in above. 7. The ld DR representing the re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was in the case of Shri Sumanchandra G. Mehta Vs. ITO in ITA no. 564/Mum/2012 wherein the co-ordinate bench observed that; 7. The present case is a perfect example of such ignorance. The assessee has shown interest income earned as well as interest paid under the head income from other sources . Not realizing that a negative figure is not accepted by the server and therefore the interest paid shown as Rs. 2,33,535/- was rejected by the server while processing the return. 8. No doubt the CBDT has the powers to frame the rules but, at the same time, it cannot benefit from the ignorance of the taxpayers using the latest technology. We do not find any reason why such error should not be rectified by the AO. This is not Ignorance of law but igno .....

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