M/s Apurba Kumar Paladhy, Kolkata V. I.T.O Wd - 17(1),kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 1971/KOL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 83093 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 2 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MD GAYASUDDIN ANSARI
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 80C; 154

Judgement Text

` , SMC(C) , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC(C) BENCH : KOLKATA () BEFORE , ) [BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM] / I.T.A NO.1971/KOL/2013 !'/ ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 APURBA KUMAR PALADHY VS. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WD-1 7(1), KOLKATA (PAN: AGEPP8608D) ($% /APPELLANT ) (&'$%/ RESPONDENT ) DATE OF HEARING: 20.08.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 02.09.2014 FOR THE APPELLANT: N O N E FOR THE RESPONDENT: MD. GAYASUDDIN ANSARI, JCIT, SR. DR () / ORDER THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE IS ARISING OUT OF ORDER OF CIT(A)-XIV, KOLKATA IN APPEAL NO. 581/CIT(A)-XIV/11-12 DATED 14.11.2012. THE PROCESS ING U/S. 143(1) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) WAS DONE BY AO ON 11.08.2009. THE SUBJECT MATTER UNDER DISPUTE IS THE REJECTION OF APPLICATION OF RE CTIFICATION U/S. 154 OF THE ACT BY ITO, WARD- 17(1), KOLKATA VIDE HIS ORDER DATED 20.07.2010. 2. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS SEEN THAT THIS APPEAL BY AS SESSEE IS DELAYED BY 137 DAYS AND ASSESSEE HAS FILED CONDONATION PETITION STATING THE REASON T HAT HE WAS NOT AWARE ABOUT THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND WHEN HE CONSULTED ADVOCATE, HE FILED AP PEAL ALONG WITH CONDONATION PETITION. THE ASSESSEE IS A CENTRAL GOVT. EMPLOYEE HAVING SALARY INCOME ONLY. THE ASSESSEE FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME IN ITR 4 INADVERTENTLY AS AGAINST THE COR RECT ITR 2. THE ASSESSEES SALARY INCOME WAS AT RS.2,53,336/- AND AFTER CLAIMING DEDUCTION U /S. 80C OF THE ACT I.E. CHAPTER-VIA DEDUCTION OF RS.1 LAC ASSESSEES INCOME WAS AT RS.1 ,53,340/-, WHICH WAS DECLARED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME FILED IN ITR 4. BUT THE REVENUE WHILE ISS UING INTIMATION U/S. 143(1) OF THE ACT COMPUTED THE INCOME AT RS.4,07,770/- AND CREATED A DEMAND OF RS.69,490/-. AS AGAINST THIS PETITION U/S. 154 OF THE ACT WAS MOVED BY THE ASSES SEE AND THE AO VIDE HIS ORDER NO. ITO- WARD-17(1),KOL/RECTIFICATION/2010-11/26 DATED 20.07 .2010 REJECTED THE PETITION U/S. 154 OF THE ACT. RELEVANT PORTION OF THE SAID ORDER READS AS U NDER: 2 ITA NO.1971/K/2013 APURBA KUMAR PALADHY, AY 08-09 THE RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 WAS FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITR 4 ON 16.07.2008. THE SAME WAS PROCESSED 143(1) ON 11.0 8.2009 RAISING AN AMOUNT OF DEMAND FOR RS. 69,490/- WHICH WAS DUE TO ASSESSEE. ON RECEIPT OF INTIMATION, A RECTIFICATION PETITION U/S. 154 OF THE I. T. ACT, 1961 WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 11.02.2010, STATING THAT THE RETURN OF INCOME IN FORM NO. ITR 4 WAS FILED DUE TO INADVERTENTLY IN PLACE OF ITR 2 AND HAVING C ONSIDERED RS.2,54,436/- AND NET TAXABLE INCOME OF RS.1,53,336/- RESULTING & INCREAS E OF INCOME AND INCOME TAX OF RS.71,331/- INSTEAD OF GENUINE PAYABLE TAX OF RS.48 08/-. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE PETITION U/S. 154 IF NOT P ERTAINING TO A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AND THE SAME IS NOT CONSIDERED FOR RECTIFICA TION. UNDERSTANDING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, THE PETITION U/S. 154 IS HEREBY REJECTED. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A), WHO ALSO UPHELD THE ACTION OF AO REJECTING THE RECTIFICATION PETITION AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE TRIBUNAL. 3. I HAVE HEARD LD. SR. DR AND GONE THROUGH FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. LD. SR. DR WAS CONFRONTED WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE CIT( A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DECLARED GROSS TOTAL INCOME AT RS.2,53,336/- AND ALSO CLAIMED DEDU CTION U/S. 80C OF THE ACT I.E. CHAPTER-VIA AT RS. 1 LAC AND THEREBY THE DECLARED TOTAL INCOME WAS AT RS.1,53,340/-. THE CIT(A) ALSO DISCUSSED THAT THE REVENUE WHILE ISSUING INTIMATION U/S. 143(1), WHILE PROCESSING RETURN OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, SEEN THE TOTAL INCOME AT RS .4,07,770/-. BUT THE CIT(A) HAD NO WHERE DISCUSSED FROM WHERE THIS INCOME HAD ARISEN. EVEN NOW BEFORE ME, WHEN CONFRONTED, LD. SR. DR COULD NOT ANSWER THIS QUERY. IN TERM OF THE ABO VE, I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEES INCOME DISCLOSED IS AT RS.2,53,336/- AND THEREBY CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S. 80C OF THE ACT AT RS. 1 LAC IS QUITE APPROPRIATE AND CORRECT POSITION OF FACTS. I T MEANS THAT THE ASSESSEES INCOME SHOULD HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AT RS.1,53,340/- AND ACCORDINGLY TAX DEMAND WILL BE COMPUTED. IN TERM OF THE ABOVE, I ALLOW THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE AND DIRECT TH E AO TO RECOMPUTE THE INCOME ACCORDINGLY. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 5. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 02.09.2014. SD/- , (MAHAVIR SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 2 ND SEPTEMBER, 2014 *+ ,- . JD.(SR.P.S.) 3 ITA NO.1971/K/2013 APURBA KUMAR PALADHY, AY 08-09 () / &0 1(0!2- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1 . $% / APPELLANT SHRI APURBA KUMAR PALADHY, 29, KALABAGA N LANE, KOLKATA-700 033. 2 &'$% / RESPONDENT ITO, WARD-17(1), KOLKATA 3 . ) ( )/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA 4. 5. ) / CIT KOLKATA 089 & / DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA '0 &/ TRUE COPY, ():/ BY ORDER, - /ASSTT. REGISTRAR .