Gopi Farm Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- 4(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 2326/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9624 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-12-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-09-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VILAS V SHINDE
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH AHMADABAD , BEFORE: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 2326/AHD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 GOPI FARM PVT. LTD. 6, NEPTUNE TOWER, ASHRAM ROAD, NAVRANGPURA, AHMEDABAD 380009 V S . INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1), AHMEDBAD PAN NO. AABCG9683R (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) /BY ASSESSEE NONE /BY REVENUE SHRI VILAS V. SHINDE, D.R. /DATE OF HEARING 02.12.2015 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 11.02.2016 O R D E R PER : RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AGAINST THE ORD ER OF LD. CIT(A)-VIII, AHMEDABAD DATED 16.07.2013 PASSED FOR A.Y. 2009-10. 2. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE IT HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 27.09.2009 SHOWING NIL INCOME. A DEMAND WAS RAI SED AT RS.34,346/- UNDER THE MAT PROVISION. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPLI CATION U/S.154 CONTENDING THEREIN THAT AS PER CLAUSE 2 OF EXPLANATION 1 APPEN DED WITH SECTION 115JB, THE AGRICULTURE INCOME OUGHT TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CO MPUTATION OF BOOK PROFIT. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, THIS INCOME WAS NOT EXCLUDED BEFORE CHARGING ITA NO. 2326/AHD/13 A.Y.09-10 (GOPI FARM PVT. LTD. VS. ITO) PAGE 2 THE TAX UPON THE ASSESSEE ON BOOK PROFIT. THE RECT IFICATION APPLICATION OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN REJECTED. 3. ON APPEAL, LD. CIT(A) HAS AGREED WITH THE VIEW O F A.O. THE DISCUSSION MADE BY THE CIT(A) READ AS UNDER: I HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE APPELLANT, INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 143(1), RECTIFICATION ORDE R UNDER SECTION 154 PASSED BY THE CPC. I HAVE ALSO CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE HARDCOP Y OF THE FORM NUMBER ITR- 6, THEE-RETURN FILED BY THE APPELLANT. THE GRIEVANCE O F THE APPELLANT IS THAT THE AGRICULTURE WAS EARNED BY IT DURING THE YEAR HAS NO T BEEN CONSIDERED FOR THE RATE PURPOSE AND MAT HAS BEEN COMPUTED ON TOTAL INCOME. AFTER CAREFULLY EXAMINING THE HARDCOPY OF ITR-6 IT IS NOTED THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT CORRECTLY FILLED THE DETAILS WHILE UPLOADIN G THE E-RETURN. THE FORM PROVIDES SPECIFIC COLUMNS FOR MENTIONING THE AGRICULTURE INC OME AND IF IT IS NOT SHOWN IN THE CORRECT COLUMN. THE CPC WHERE THE RETURNS ARE PROCE SSED ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPELLANT WITHOUT HUMAN INTERVENTIO N, WILL COMPUTE THE TAXABLE INCOME AS PER THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE RETUR N. THE EXAMINATION OF THE RETURN DEARLY SHOWS THAT THE CPC HAS BEEN RIGHT IN REJECTI NG THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT. THE PART-A P&L OF ITR-6 IS MEANT FOR THE DETAILS PERTAINING TO PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT FOR THE PREVI OUS YEAR, IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS A.Y.2008 09. THERE ARE 50 ITEMS IN THIS PART WHIC H CONTAINS VARIOUS INFORMATION FOR THE PERSONS MAINTAINING A REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS . IN CASE OF THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE NOT MAINTAINED ITEM NUMBER 51 ONLY IS TO BE FIL LED. IN THIS PART THERE IS A SPECIFIC COLUMN, '3I' FOR AGRICULTURE INCOME. THE APPELLANT HAS SHOWN NIL INCOME IN THIS COLUMN SIMILARLY PART B-TI THERE IS COLUMN NUMBER 1 2 FOR NET AGRICULTURE INCOME/ANY OTHER INCOME FOR THE PURPOSE. FOR THIS COLUMN THERE IS A REFERENCE OF PART 4 OF SCHEDULE EI. FURTHER IN SCHEDULE EI OF THE RETURN THERE IS A SPECIFIC COLUMN NUMBER 4 WHICH IS PROVIDED FOR NET AGRICULTURE INCOME/ANY OT HER INCOME FOR RATE PURPOSES. THE APPELLANT HAS AGAIN FILLED NIL IN THIS COLUMN. THE ABOVE FACTS CLEARLY SHOW THAT THE APPELLANT HAS INCORRECTLY FILLED OF THE FORM WHICH WAS RESULTED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOM E, WHICH IS INCORRECT ACCORDING TO THE APPELLANT BUT CORRECT AS PER THE DATA PROVID ED BY IT. THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AT THIS STAGE BECAUSE NOWHERE IN THE RETURN IT HAS SHOWN INCOME AS AGRICULTURE INCOME. IT IS POSSIBLE TO COMMIT ERR OR WHILE FILLING SEVERAL COLUMNS IN THE FORM HOWEVER, THE APPELLANT SHOULD HAVE SHOWN T HAT THE AGRICULTURE INCOME AT ONE PLACE AT LEAST. THE APPELLANT HAS NOT SHOWN AGRICU LTURE INCOME ANYWHERE IN THE RETURN. SINCE THERE IS NO PRIMA FACIE ERROR THE CL AIM OF THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE ACCEPTED NOW AS IT WOULD TANTAMOUNT TO SCRUTINIZING THE DETAILS AND WILL BE BEYOND THE SPHERE OF PRIMA FACIE ERROR. THERE IS NO INFORMATI ON ON RECORD WHICH SUPPORTS THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT. I AM, THEREFORE, CONSTRAIN ED TO HOLD THAT THE CPC HAS RIGHTLY REJECTED THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION OF THE APPEL LANT AND COMPUTED THE TAX PAYABLE CORRECTLY ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION FURNISHED BY THE APPELLANT. THE APPEAL IS ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 4. IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF HEARING, NO ONE HAS COME PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WRITTEN SUBMISSION HAS BEEN FILED. ITA NO. 2326/AHD/13 A.Y.09-10 (GOPI FARM PVT. LTD. VS. ITO) PAGE 3 5. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF LD. D.R., WE HAVE GONE TH ROUGH THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION. THE POWER OF RECTIFICATION U/S.154 OF THE ACT CAN BE EXERCISED ONLY WHEN THE MISTAKE WHICH IS SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED IS OBVIOUS AND PATENT MISTAKE WHICH IS APPARENT FROM THE RECORD AND NOT A MISTAKE WHICH REQUIRES TO BE ESTABLISHED BY ARGUMENTS AND LONG TERM PROCESS OF R EASONING ON POINTS ON WHICH THERE MAY CONCEIVABLE BE TWO OPINIONS. A PER USAL OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER WOULD INDICATE THAT THE CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTRE H AS ACCEPTED THE ENTRIES MADE BY THE ASSESSEE ITSELF. THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT REVIS ED ITS RETURN OF INCOME IN ORDER TO RECTIFY THE COLUMNS. THERE IS NO APPARENT MISTA KE, AS SUCH, DISCERNABLE FROM THE RECORD. LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS CONS IDERED THIS ASPECT, WE DO NOT FIND ANY ERROR IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 11/02/20 16 SD/- SD/- ( MANISH BORAD) (RAJPAL YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL ME MBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 11/02/2016 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / APPELLANT 2. !' / RESPONDENT 3. #$#%& ' ' ' / CONCERNED CIT 4. ' ' ' - / CIT (A) 5. () *' ++%& , ' ' %& , $ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. * ./ / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ' # ' ' %& , $