CHITRA UTTAM KHARE,PUNE V. ITO, WARD 12(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 236/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Chitra Uttam Khare, an individual and senior citizen, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) confirming an intimation by the CPC that added back a loss declared from a partnership firm to the assessee's income. Initially, the CPC processed the return under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, resulting in a higher assessed income. After the assessee's rectification application under section 154, the CPC accepted the returned income, but the CIT(A) was unaware of this rectification and confirmed the original intimation due to the assessee's failure to inform about the rectification. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and set aside the CIT(A)'s order, remanding the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 396603 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AVIYOGI AMBADKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S. S. PURANIK
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.236/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Chitra Uttam Khare, 691, Saraswati Vilas Hospital, Laxmi Road, Opp. Shiva Sadan, Narayan Peth, Pune- 411030. PAN : ACDPK5474D Vs. ITO, Ward-12(1), Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.11.2024 passed by Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-6, Delhi [‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in Confirming Income Processed u/s 143(1) at Rs. 15,03,390/- against the returned Income of Rs. 5,85,800/- Assessee by : Shri S. S. Puranik Revenue by : Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar Date of hearing : 12.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 26.05.2025 ITA No.236/PUN/2025 2 Appellant Prays for deletion of addition. 2. Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in misstating \"Income declared in return after claiming declared loss of Rs. 9,17,600/ under the head share of loss from firm. Appellant Prays to cancel the addition of Rs.9,17,600/- as income declared Rs.5,85,800/- is without claim of said loss. 3. Commissioner of Income Tax has erred in, not holding that intimation u/s 143(1) with variation in income is bad in law as CPC did not intimate proposed variation before processing final intimation. 4. CIT(A) has not acted just and fair in confirming addition twisting submission in statement of facts and further passing exparte order. 5. Appellant prays to add, alter, amend, modify and/or withdraw the ground. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual senior citizen deriving income from medical profession, income from other sources and also a partner in Saraswati Vilas Hospital. The return of income for the period under consideration was furnished on 07.01.2021 declaring taxable income of Rs.5,85,800/- after claiming deductions under Chapter VI-A of the IT Act. Apart from above income, the assessee also declared loss of Rs.9,17,590/- from partnership firm Saraswati Vilas Hospital. The return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the IT Act by CPC vide order dated 15.12.2021 wherein CPC has added back Rs.9,17,592/- as income of the assessee under the head “business and profession” ITA No.236/PUN/2025 3 and accordingly determined the income of the assessee at Rs.15,03,394/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.5,85,800/-. Being aggrieved with the intimation order dated 15.12.2021, assessee filed a rectification application u/s 154 of the IT Act before CPC on 18.12.2021. Since the assessee did not received any rectification order within 30 days, he also preferred first appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on 14.01.2022. Fortunately, CPC accepted the mistake and rectified the intimation vide order dated 12.04.2022 and accepted the income returned by the assessee. However, Ld. CIT(A) remained ignorant about the rectification order passed by the CPC, since the assessee failed to intimate Ld. CIT(A) that the addition has already been deleted by CPC rectification order dated 12.04.2022. Ld. CIT(A) issued notices for hearing on 18.10.2024 and also on 07.11.2024, however the assessee could not see and missed the above two notices of hearing which resulted in passing of ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A), who consequently confirmed the original intimation order passed by CPC vide dated 15.12.2021. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. ITA No.236/PUN/2025 4 4. We have heard Ld. counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that CPC vide original intimation order dated 15.12. 2021 made certain addition and subsequently on an application filed by the assessee u/s 154 of the IT Act rectified the earlier intimation and accepted the income returned by the assessee and also issued a rectified order on 12.04.2022. We further find that when the appeal was listed for hearing the assessee could not appear before Ld. CIT(A) and consequently the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution resulting in confirmation of original intimation passed by CPC since Ld. CIT(A) was ignorant of the fact that CPC has already passed a rectification order accepting the income returned by the assessee. Under these circumstances of the case, we find force in the arguments of Ld. counsel of the assessee that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) needs to be set-aside. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the light of rectification order dated 12.04.2022 passed by CPC wherein income returned by the assessee was accepted, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed ITA No.236/PUN/2025 5 by Ld. CIT(A). Thus, the effective ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on this 26th day of May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 26th May, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Addl/JCIT(A)-6, Delhi. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "