, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI D.K. TYAGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.2715/AHD/2012 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) AMBIVIJAY STEEL SUPPLIERS PVT.LTD. 305, 2 ND HOUSE PATEL HOUSE NEAR VINOD CHAMBERS OUTSIDE VINOD CHAMBERS AHMEDABAD / VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1) AHMEDABAD ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAECA 4554 G ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI CHIRAG R.SHAH / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI Y.P.VERMA, SR.D.R. / DATE OF HEARING : 07/03/2013 !'# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15/03/2013 $% / O R D E R PER SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARISING FR OM THE ORDER OF LD.CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD DATED 24/09/2012 PASSED FOR ASST.YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE ORDERS ARE AS UNDER:- ITA NO.2715/AHD /2012 AMBIVIJAY STEEL SUPPLIERS PVT.LTD. VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2008-09 - 2 - 2.1. THE ASSESSEE ELECTRONICALLY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR AY 2008-09 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.5,51,715/-, AF TER DISALLOWING RS.1,97,104/- ON ACCOUNT OF FBT EXPENSE, INCOME TAX PAYMENT AND DEFERRED TAX PROVISION. IN THE INTIMATION U/S.143( 1) RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THE TOTAL INCOME WAS ASSESSED AT RS.6,65, 351/-. WHILE ARRIVING AT THE AFORESAID INCOME, THE SUO MOTU DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WERE AGAIN DISALLOWED RESULTING INTO DOUBLE DISALLO WANCE. ACCORDINGLY, ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION U/S.154 BEFORE AO REQ UESTING HIM TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKE AND RECALCULATE THE TAX. AO VIDE HIS O RDER DATED 12.5.2011, REJECTED THE APPLICATION FOR THE REASON THAT ACCORD ING TO HIM THE MISTAKE IN QUESTION WAS ON PART OF THE ASSESSEE AND NOT OF THE DEPARTMENT AND FURTHER THE ASSESSEE HAD THE OPTION OF FILING A REV ISED RETURN U/S.139(5) OF THE IT ACT. AGAINST THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE AO, ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE CIT(A). CIT(A) UPHELD THE ORDER OF T HE AO AND DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF C IT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWIN G GROUNDS:- 1. THE ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED U/S.154 OF IT ACT B Y THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHOR ITY IS BAD IN LAW AND DESERVES TO BE UNCALLED FOR. 2. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS FIRST APPELLAT E AUTHORITY HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN MAKING AND CONFIRMING RESPECTIVELY THE ADDITION OF RS.1,13,646/- U/S.154 OF I.T. ACT T HE SAME DESERVES TO BE DELETED. 3. BEFORE US, THE LD.AR OF THE ASSESSEE MR.CHIRAG R .SHAH SUBMITTED THAT WHILE ELECTRONICALLY FILING THE RETURN OF INCO ME IN THE SCHEDULE WITH ITA NO.2715/AHD /2012 AMBIVIJAY STEEL SUPPLIERS PVT.LTD. VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2008-09 - 3 - RESPECT TO COMPUTATION OF INCOME, IT HAD SUO MOTU DISALLOWED THE PROVISION FOR FBT AND DEFERRED TAX. THE AFORESAID ITEMS ON ACCOUNT OF TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR, AGAIN SHOWN IN THE SCHEDULES O F THE RETURN. WHILE PROCESSING THE RETURN U/S.143(1) OF THE IT ACT DUE TO THE ERROR IN REPORTING OF FIGURE OF FBT AND DEFERRED TAX, THE SAME WERE ON CE AGAIN DISALLOWED, RESULTING INTO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE. HE THEREFORE S UBMITTED THAT THE MISTAKE IN QUESTION WAS AN APPARENT MISTAKE ON RECO RD WHICH NEEDS RECTIFICATION. HE ALSO PLACED ON RECORD THE COPY O F THE ENTIRE RETURN AND THE COMPUTATION ALONG WITH THE COPIES OF BALANCE-S HEET. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT THE MISTAKE ON ACCOUNT OF DOUBLE DI SALLOWANCE BE CORRECTED AND FOR WHICH NECESSARY INSTRUCTIONS MAY BE ISSUED TO THE AO. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD.SR.DR MR.Y.P.VERMA RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE AO. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. BEFORE US, THE LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THE SUO MOTU DISALLOWANCE MADE ON ACCOUNT OF FBT EXPENSE, INCOME TAX PAYMENT AND DEFERRED TAX PROVISION HAS BEEN DISALLOWED TWICE ON ACCOUNT OF E RRONEOUS REPORTING OF FIGURE IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE MISTAKE WAS D UE TO CLERICAL MISTAKE AND TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR ON ITS PART WHICH HAS RESUL TED INTO DOUBLE DISALLOWANCE. BEFORE US, LD.DR COULD NOT CONTROVE RT THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE. LOOKING TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE MATTER BE REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF AO. WE THEREFORE DIRECT THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF AO, SO T HAT HE CAN VERIFY THE CONTENTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND AFTER VERIFICATION PASS THE NECESSARY ORDERS AS PER LAW. ITA NO.2715/AHD /2012 AMBIVIJAY STEEL SUPPLIERS PVT.LTD. VS. ITO ASST.YEAR - 2008-09 - 4 - 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEE S APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR S TATISTICAL PURPOSE ONLY. SD/- SD/- ( D.K. TYAGI ) ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTAN T MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 15 / 03 /2013 &.., .(../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS !'# $#! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ) *+ , / CONCERNED CIT 4. , () / THE CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD 5. /01 ((*+, *+#, 23$)$ / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. 145 6 / GUARD FILE. % & / BY ORDER, / ( //TRUE COPY// '/% () ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION DATED 11.3.2013 (DICTATION-PAD 6 PAGES ATTACHED) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 12.3.13 OTHER MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S15.3.13 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 15.3.13 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 9. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER