BRAVURA SOLUTIONS INDIA LLP,NEW DELHI V. .DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

SA 346/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Bravura Solutions India LLP, which filed a stay application against the demand raised for the Assessment Year 2020-21. The primary issue was a discrepancy between the total income assessed and the income reflected in the tax computation sheet, which was identified as a mistake apparent on record. The Assessing Officer (AO) initially did not rectify this mistake, leading to the Tribunal's intervention. The Tribunal directed the AO to rectify the mistake, which was done, but the rectification did not address the issues raised by the assessee regarding the deductions claimed under sections 10AA and 90/90A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found the AO's refusal to accept the rectification application under section 154 as incorrect, given the lack of discussion in the final assessment order regarding the enhanced assessed income in the tax computation sheet.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470156 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 13-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: I
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 28-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAHIL KUMAR BANSAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AJIT JAIN
• Keywords: Rectification of order; Application of stay
• Section: 154; 10AA

Judgement Text

"Page | 1 INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “I”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SA No. 346/Del/2024 (In ITA No.3944/Del/2024) (Assessment Year: 2020-21) Bravura Solutions India LLP, P-24, Green Park Extension, New Delhi Vs. DCIT, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AAQFB3843C Assessee by : Shri Ajit Jain, CA Shri Aditya Anand, CA Revenue by: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13/12/2024 Date of pronouncement 13/12/2024 O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH, AM: 1. By virtue of this stay application, the assessee seeks to keep the demand raised for AY 2020-21 in abeyance. 2. On perusal of the final assessment order, we find that the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 10,44,10,319/-. But in the tax computation sheet enclosed along with assessment order, the total income was reflected at Rs. 23,24,02,200/- which constitute a mistake apparent on record. This Tribunal vide its order sheet notings dated 13.09.2024 directed the ld AO to rectify the mistake pursuant to rectification application already preferred by the assessee in this SA No. 346/Del/2024 Bravura Solutions India LLP Page | 2 regard. The said rectification order u/s 154 of the Act was passed by the ld AO on 04.12.2024 by observing as under:- “[5] The Assessing Officer has not mentioned explicitly and in expressive language for treatment of deduction claimed u/s 10AA and 90/90A of the IT Act 1961 which is the reasons/issues as mentioned in Para-2 above for selection of scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3) of the IT Act 1961. However, the same had been disallowed in the Computation of income/Sheet. The matter leads legal interpretation of allowability of delayed Form 56F and Form 67 report, which is debatable issues and not a mistake which is apparent from record. Therefore, the rectification application u/s 154 of the IT Act 1961 of the assessee cannot be accepted.” 3. On perusal of the aforesaid rectification order, it is very clear that as income had increased only in the tax computation sheet and there is absolutely no discussion made by the ld AO in his assessment order. Hence, at this stage we would like to adjudicate only the actual addition made in the final assessment order of Rs. 60,57,439/-. The ld AR drew our attention to the letter addressed to the ld AO on 27.08.2024 stating that the total demand payable by the assessee on the addition made in the sum of Rs. 60,57,439/- would be Rs. 8,66,405/- only. The ld AR came forward to pay a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs which would be more than 20% of the disputed demand arising out of addition of Rs. 60,57,439/-. When these facts were confronted by the ld DR, DR insisted for payment for payment of 20% of the total outstanding demand as per tax computation sheet. In our considered opinion, the submission of the ld DR cannot be entertained as for adopting the enhanced assessed income in the tax computation sheet directly by the ld AO there was absolutely no discussion regarding the same in the final assessment order. Hence, we hold that the SA No. 346/Del/2024 Bravura Solutions India LLP Page | 3 submission made by the ld AR to be fair and direct the assessee to pay a sum of Rs. 2 lakh on or before 31.12.2024. 4. The total demand outstanding is hereby kept in abeyance for a period of 180 days from the date of this order or till the disposal of the appeal, whichever is earlier, subject to assessee making payment of Rs. 2 lakhs on or before 31.12.2024. The main appeal is listed for hearing today on 22.01.2025 with the consent of both the parties and no fresh notice of hearing would follow for the same. 5. Stay application of the assessee is disposed off in the above mentioned terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 13/12/2024. -Sd/- -Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (M. BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: 13/12/2024 A K Keot Copy forwarded to 1. Applicant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR:ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, New Delhi "