M.R.Shanmugam, Kancheepuram V. ACIT, Bangalore

ITA 350/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7577 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-02-2016
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-02-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A B KOLI JCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: R VIJAYARAGHAVAN
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 6

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI , ! . ' #$ BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G.PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.350 /MDS./2015 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR :2009-10) MR.M.R.SHANMUGAM , 33-C,HOSPITAL ROAD, KANCHIPURAM 631 502. VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KANCHIPURAM CIRCLE, M M AVENUE, KANCHIPURAM. PAN AOUPS 4586 B ( %& / APPELLANT ) ( '(%& / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.R.VIJAYARAGHAVAN,ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : MR.A.B.KOLI,JCIT, D.R ! / DATE OF HEARING : 10.03.2016 '# ! /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.03.2016 ) / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGA INST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-III, C HENNAI DATED 13.10.2014 PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 -10 . ITA NO.350/MDS/2015 2 2. ASSESSEES APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED LATE BY 6 DAY S. AN AFFIDAVIT FROM HIS AUDITOR SRI K.R.SATYAM EXPLAINING THE REAS ON FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED. REASONS SHOWN ARE JUSTIFIED AND HENCE, DELAY IS CONDONED AND APPEAL ADMITTED 3. THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS WITH REGARD TO NOT CARRYING OUT THE RECTIFICATION U/S.154 OF THE ACT BY THE AO IN R ESPECT LOSS OF ` 4,33,299/- UNDER SHARE TRADING BUSINESS AGAINST OTH ER HEAD OF INCOME. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS AN INDIVIDUAL, DERIVING INCOME FROM LAB AND ONLINE TRA DING BUSINESS AND FROM OTHER SOURCES. THE ASSESSEE E-FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON 29.9.2009 ADMITTING TOTA L INCOME OF ` 15,92,410/- BEFORE SET OFF OF ONLINE TRADING BUSINE SS LOSS. THE RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT BY CPC, BANGALORE ON THE ASSESSED TOTAL INCOME OF ` 20,25,710/- AND AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF ` 38,250/- THEREAFTER, THE ASSESSEE FILED A RECTIF ICATION APPLICATION U/S.154 OF THE ACT BEFORE CPC BANGALORE AND THIS AP PLICATION WAS ITA NO.350/MDS/2015 3 REJECTED VIDE RECTIFICATION ORDER DATED 25.04.2011. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A). 5. ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE ASSE SSEE HAS NOT UPLOADED HIS CLAIM PROPERLY WHILE FLING THE RETURN OF INCOME, AS IT IS EVIDENT FROM THE CPC REJECTION LETTER AND THE INTIM ATION U/S.143(1) OF THE ACT. HENCE, THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. ADMITTEDLY, IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE FILE D E-RETURN SHOWING THE PROFIT BEFORE TAX AT ` 21,20,625/- ( E-RETURN COPY AT PAGE-5 OF PAPER BOOK). THE ASSESSEE FINALLY PUT THE PROFIT AND GAI NS FROM THE BUSINESS AT ` 15,44,778/- ( PAGE-8 OF PAPER BOOK, PART-B-TTI ). ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, IT MEANS THAT ASSESSEE H AS SET OFF OF THE LOSS FROM SHARE TRADING BUSINESS AGAINST INCOME FRO M OTHER HEADS. SINCE THERE IS CONFUSION IN THE MIND OF THE ASSESSE E WHILE FILING THE E- RETURN THAT MISTAKE WAS CREPT AND IT IS REQUIRED TO BE RECTIFIED. IN OUR OPINION, THERE IS A FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE AS SESSEES COUNSEL, ITA NO.350/MDS/2015 4 WHICH IS REQUIRED TO BE CORRECTED. ACCORDINGLY, WE DIRECT THE AO TO CARRY OUT NECESSARY RECTIFICATION IN THIS REGARD. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ONTHURSDAY , THE 24 TH OF MARCH,2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) (G.PAVAN KUMAR) ( ( $% & ) ) ' CHANDRA POOJARI () JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 24 TH MARCH,2016. K S SUNDARAM. *+)),-).- /COPY TO: ) 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ) /)'( /CIT(A) 4. ) / /CIT 5. -01 )2 /DR 6. 13)4 /GF