आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायऩीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अऩीऱ सं/ITA No.173/C TK/2024 (ननधाारण वषा / Asses s m ent Year :2020-2021) Goutami Singhsetty, Auto Nagar, JK Road, Rayagada, Odisha-765001 Vs ITO, Rayagada Ward, Rayagada PAN No. : DEVPS 3782 F (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate and Shri N. Trinath Rao, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR स ु नवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 18/06/2024 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Chandigarh, dated 23.01.2024 in DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1060002438(1) for the assessment year 2020-2021. 2. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee is a lady, who is an individual and is a teacher teaching psychology on contract basis in Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya. It was the submission that she had received contract receipts of Rs.2,23,052/- as her remuneration for five months and the same was also disclosed in her Form 26AS. It was the submission that she had filed her return of income by herself online and had by mistake added an extra zero on the right side of her returned income and the income was shown as Rs.22,32,520/- as against Rs.2,23,052/-. The ld. AR placed before me a copy of the Form 26AS as also the return filed. It was the submission that on account of the said ITA No.173/CTK/2024 2 mistake, the return filed by the assessee came to be processed and the intimation came to be issued u/s.143(1) of the Act creating a demand on her. It was the submission that when the assessee came to know the above mistake in the return, though she tried for filing revised return, however, the time for filing revised return was expired. Thereafter the assessee filed rectification petition and the same came to be rejected. It was the submission that the assessee has never earned such an income and the evidences available also clearly shows that the assessee had not earned the said income. It was the prayer that the issues may be restored to the file of AO for verification and determination of the correct income. 3. In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A). 4. I have considered the rival submissions. Admittedly, a perusal of the facts of the present case and the Form 26AS, which has been placed before me is updated as on 17.06.2024. A perusal of the bank statement of the assessee also shows that the assessee has never received nor possessed the income in excess of Rs.2,23,052/-. This being so and as it is noticed that the returned income when compared to the income as shown in the Form 26AS, shows that this is nothing but a mistake in adding a zero on the right side of the figure, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of AO for verification of the actual income of the assessee. Thus, the AO is directed to verify the actual income of the assessee and bring the correct income of the assessee to tax. ITA No.173/CTK/2024 3 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 18/06/2024. Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 18/06/2024 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतलऱपऩ अग्रेपषत/Cop.y of the Order forwarded to : आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack 1. अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant- Goutami Singhsetty, Auto Nagar, JK Road, Rayagada, Odisha-765001 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- ITO, Rayagada Ward, Rayagada 3. आयकर आय ु क्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आय ु क्त / CIT 5. ववभागीय प्रयतयनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्ज पाईऱ / Guard file. सत्यावऩत प्रयत //True Copy//