Sarkar Talwar, Faridabad V. ITO, Ward-2(3), Faridabad

ITA 2685/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 119 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4431 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAUSHLENDRA TIWARI
• Keywords: Bonafide mistake
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH D NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO.2685/DEL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SARKAR TALWAR, 2851, SECTOR-7E, FARIDABAD, HARYANA. V. ITO, WARD-2(3), FARIDABAD. TAN/PAN: ABDPT 6373K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI KAUSHLENDRA TIWARI, SR.D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 13 08 2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 23 10 2018 O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA, J.M.: THE AFORESAID APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.11.2017, PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), FARIDABAD FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 IN RELATION TO THE ORDER PA SSED U/S.154. IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: A SUM OF RS. 30 LACS RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE AS A N AWARD FROM BCCI (BOARD OF CRICKET CONTROL OF INDIA) IS EXEMPT U/S.10(17A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT READ WITH CIRCULAR NO.2/2014 (F. NO. 99/01/2014-ITA). THE ASSESSEE WRONGLY INCLUDE THE S AME IN HIS INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14 TO MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE THE APPEALS FOR DELETION OF THIS SUM OF RS.30 LACS FROM HIS TAXABLE INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. I.T.A. NO.2685/DEL/2018 2 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE; THEREFORE, WE ARE PROCEEDING TO DECIDE T HE APPEAL ON MATERIAL PLACED ON RECORD AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LEARNED DR. 3. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 25.07.2013 DE CLARING INCOME OF RS.38,90,060/- AND SUCH A RETURN WAS DULY PROCESSED U/S 143(1). LATER ON, ASSESSEE FILED AN A PPLICATION U/S.154 BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER STATING THAT D UE TO BONAFIDE MISTAKE SUM OF RS.30 LACS RECEIVED AS AWAR D FROM BCCI (BOARD OF CRICKET CONTROL OF INDIA), WHICH OTH ERWISE WAS EXEMPT U/S.10(17A) OF THE ACT AND ALSO CLARIFIED BY THE CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO.2/2014 , WAS BY MISTAKE SHOWN AS TAXABLE INCOME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER DATED 31.01.2017, ON THE GROUND THAT IT IS NOT A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD WITHIN THE SCOPE OF SECTION 154, ON THE GROUND THAT, SINCE ASSESSEE HAS HIMSELF SHOWN THE RECEIPTS FROM THE BCCI AS TAXABLE IN HIS ITR FILED, THEREFORE, SUCH A MISTAKE CANNOT BE RECTIFIED U/S.1 54. 4. LD. CIT (A) TOO HAS REJECTED THE ASSESSEES APPE AL ON THE GROUND THAT SUCH A REQUEST MADE BY THE ASSESSEE TO EXCLUDE SUM OF RS.30 LAC FROM THE TAXABLE INCOME IS BEYOND THE SCOPE AND AMBIT OF SECTION 154. AFTER DETAILED DISCUSSION ON THE SCOPE OF SECTION 154 AND RELYING UPON VARIOUS JUDGME NTS, HE HAS HELD THAT ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO GIVE A JUSTIFIC ATION IN ITS APPLICATION U/S.154, THAT THERE IS A MISTAKE APPARE NT FROM I.T.A. NO.2685/DEL/2018 3 RECORD. HE HAS FURTHER HELD THAT HERE IT IS A DEBAT ABLE ISSUE, BECAUSE ASSESSEE HAS FIRST SHOWN IT AS A TAXABLE IN COME AND THEN HAS CLAIMED TO BE EXEMPTED FROM TAX. THUS, ON THIS GROUND ALSO SUCH A CLAIM CANNOT BE MAINTAINED. 5. AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DEPARTMENT REPRESENT ATIVE AND ON PERUSAL OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION U/S.154 HAS BEEN REJECTED ON THE GROUND THAT AMOUNT OF RS.30 LAC RECEIVED FROM BCCI HAS BEEN SHOWN AS A TAXABLE INCOME. ONCE, IT IS BROUGHT TO T HE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT INCOME SHOWN IN THE R ETURN OF INCOME IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND SUCH AN IN COME CANNOT BE TAXED UNDER THE INCOME TAX ACT OR IS ENTI TLED FOR EXEMPTION, THEN THERE CANNOT BE ESTOPPEL AGAINST TH E ASSESSEE TO CLAIM IT AS EXEMPT AND ASSESSING OFFICE R CANNOT REJECT THE SAME SIMPLY BECAUSE ASSESSEE HAD SHOWN I T IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. IT IS A WELL SETTLED LAW THAT TAX CAN BE LEVIED UNDER THE EXPRESS PROVISION OF LAW AND IF ANY DEDUC TION OR EXEMPTION IS ALLOWABLE TO THE ASSESSEE IN LAW, THEN IT IS THE DUTY UPON THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO COMPUTE THE INCO ME AND ALLOW SUCH DEDUCTION UNDER SUCH EXPRESS PROVISION O F THE LAW. IF THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT SUCH AN INCOME IS EXEMPTED U/S. 10(17A) WHICH IS DULY SUPPORTED BY CBDT CIRCUL AR WHICH IS BINDING ON THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES, THEN T HE SAME NEEDS TO BE EXEMPTED AND ALLOWED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ACCORDINGLY, WE REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE THE ASSESSEES CLAIM I N LIGHT OF PROVISIONS OF LAW AND IF SUCH A CLAIM IS ALLOWABLE IN VIEW OF I.T.A. NO.2685/DEL/2018 4 THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.2 OF 2014 R.W.S. 10(17A), THEN SAME SHOULD BE ALLOWED. ACCORDINGLY, APPEAL OF THE ASSES SEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 23 RD OCTOBER, 2018. SD/- SD/- [L.P. SAHU] [AMIT SHUKLA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 23 RD OCTOBER, 2018 PKK: