Shri Sushilkumar Roshanlal Jain, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT, Circle-12, Ahmedabad

ITA 3479/AHD/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7942 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2015
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, AHMEDABAD , , BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.3479/AHD/2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SHRI SUSHILKUMAR ROSHANLAL JAIN 16, ALISHAN COMPLEX DANILIMDA AHMEDABAD- 380 022 / VS. THE ACIT CIRCLE-1(2) AHMEDABAD # ./ ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AARPJ 4244 J ( #% / APPELLANT ) .. ( &#% / RESPONDENT ) #%' / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.N. DIVATIA, AR &#%(' / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI JAMES KURIAN, SR.DR )*(+ / DATE OF HEARING 19/12/2017 ,-./(+ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22 /12/2017 / O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM: THE CAPTIONED APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED AT THE INSTA NCE OF THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX(APPEALS)-6, AHMEDABAD [CIT(A) IN SHORT] DATED 30/09/2015 ARISING IN THE RECTIFICATION ORDER PASSED UNDER S.154 OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'THE ACT') D ATED 22/03/2013 BY THE ITA NO.3479/AHD /2015 SUSHILKUMAR R. JAIN VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 2 - ASSESSING OFFICER (AO) WITH REFERENCE TO ASSESSMENT ORDER PASSED UNDER S.143(3) DATED 08/12/2010 RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT Y EAR (AY) 2008-09. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL INTER ALIA DECLARED RENTAL INCOME OF RS.16,09,032/- FROM RELIANCE INSUR ANCE CO.LTD. WHILE FILING ITS RETURN OF INCOME. THE AO COMPLETED REGU LAR ASSESSMENT UNDER S.143(3) ON 08/12/2010 WHERE THE RENTAL INCOME OFFE RED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS ACCEPTED. SUBSEQUENT TO THE ASSESSMENT, THE AO ISSUED NOTICE UNDER S.154 OF THE ACT ALLEGING THAT TDS DETAILS REFLECTE D RENTAL INCOME OF RS.26,80,412/- INSTEAD OF RS.16,09,032/- REPORTED B Y THE ASSESSEE. THE DIFFERENCE OF RS.10,71,380/- WAS ACCORDINGLY ADDED TO THE ASSESSED INCOME VIDE ORDER UNDER S.154 DATED 22/03/2013. 3. IN THE FIRST APPEAL, THE CIT(A) ALSO OBSERVED TH AT THE INCOME AS PER TDS CERTIFICATE WAS NOT DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME WHICH IS CLEARLY A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD. IT WAS FURTHER OBS ERVED THAT AO WAS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY LONG DRAWN PROCESS AND MERELY FOUND THE MISTAKE IN THE DOCUMENT AND RETURN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE INCOME SHOWN IN THE TDS CERTIFICATE WAS NOT DISCLOSED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME. THE CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY UPHELD THE ACTION OF RECTIFICATION CARR IED OUT BY THE AO UNDER S.154. HOWEVER, ON FACTS, GRANTED CERTAIN RELIEFS FROM THE ADDITION AND RETAINED RECTIFICATION TO THE EXTENT OF RS.4,64,000 /- ONLY. 4. STILL AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL B EFORE THE TRIBUNAL. ITA NO.3479/AHD /2015 SUSHILKUMAR R. JAIN VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 3 - 5. THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSESSEE MR.S.N.DIVATIA RAISED THE LEGAL POINT THAT THE AFORESAID RECTIFICATION INVOLVES EXAMINATI ON OF SEVERAL DOCUMENTS AND IS COMPLEX IN NATURE. THE LD.AR SUBM ITTED THAT SUCH LONG DRAWN PROCESS FOR EXECUTING RECTIFICATION IS N OT WITHIN THE AMBIT OF SECTION 154 OF THE ACT. THE LD.AR ACCORDINGLY URGE D FOR CANCELLATION OF THE ORDER PASSED UNDER S.154 OF THE ACT. 6. THE LD.DR RELIED UPON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BE LOW. AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE AO NOTICED FROM T HE TDS DETAILS THAT CORRESPONDING RENT HAS NOT BEEN CORRECTLY BEEN REPO RTED. THE MISMATCH BETWEEN ACTUAL RENT DECLARED BY THE ASSESSEE AND TH E RENT CREDITED IN THE ACCOUNT OF ASSESSEE BY THE TENANTS AS PER TDS DETAI LS WAS SOUGHT TO BE RECTIFIED UNDER S.154 OF THE ACT. WE DO NOT FIND ANY IRREGUL ARITY IN THE ACTION OF THE AO IN SO FAR AS SCOPE OF AUTHORITY UNDER S.154 OF THE ACT IS CONCERNED. IN OUR VIEW, THE AO IS CAPABLE OF RECTIFYING THE MISTAKE A PPARENT ON RECORDS. THE MISMATCH BETWEEN ACTUAL RENT DECLARED AND AS PER TD S CERTIFICATE ARE MANIFEST ON RECORDS. THE SUBSEQUENT QUANTIFICATION MAY BE A LTERED ON CONSIDERATION OF THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE FOR WHICH OPPORTUNITY WAS GRANTED. THE CIT(A) IN OUR VIEW HAS CORRECTLY AFFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE A O SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION IN THE QUANTIFICATION OF ERROR. WE THUS DECLINE TO IN TERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). ITA NO.3479/AHD /2015 SUSHILKUMAR R. JAIN VS. ACIT ASST.YEAR 2008-09 - 4 - 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. THIS ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 22/ 12 /2017 SD/- SD/- () ( ) (RAJPAL YADAV) ( PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 22/ 12 /2017 3..),.)../ T.C. NAIR, SR. PS !'#$%$' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. #% / THE APPELLANT 2. &#% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 456+ 7+ / CONCERNED CIT 4. 7+ ( ) / THE CIT(A)-6, AHMEDABAD 5. 89:+)56 , 56/ , 4 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. :<* / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, &8++ //TRUE COPY// / ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION .20.12.17 (DICTATION-PAD 8- P AGES ATTACHED AT THE END OF THIS APPEAL-FILE) 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 20.12.17 3. OTHER MEMBER 4. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S.. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR.P .S./P.S.22.12.17 7. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK 22.12.17 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK ... 9. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER.. 10. DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER