| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ᭠यायपीठ, कोलकाता | IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C(SMC)” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 596/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Amitabh Jalan Family Trust 6/7, AJC Bose Road Beckbagan Kolkata - 700017 [PAN : AADTA1881C] Vs Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru अपीलाथᱮ/ (Appellant) ᮧ᭜ यथᱮ/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri K.M. Roy, A/R Revenue by : Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. CIT, D/R सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 03/05/2023 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 22/05/2023 आदेश/O R D E R PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the ld. CIT(A)”], passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), dated 12/09/2022 for the Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Private Specific Trust and filed its return of income for the Assessment Year in question on 29/12/2020 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. While doing so, assessee has declared gross rent from house property at Rs.4,72,668/-, which resulted Rs.3,30,68/- as income from house property after standard deduction of 30% and assessee has also declared business loss of Rs. (-) 3,34,510/- resultantly net income has been shown at zero after setting off of the business losses of Rs.(-)3,642/- has been carried forward. However, in the return, assessee has computed business loss of Rs.(-)3,34,510/- after I.T.A. No. 596/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Amitabh Jalan Family Trust 2 claiming house property income of Rs.8,08,956/- under the heading “income/receipts credited to profit and loss account considered under other heads of income”. However, while processing the return such claim of house property income under the heading “income/receipts credited to profit and loss account considered other heads of income” has been reduced to Rs.4,72,668/- instead of Rs.8,08,956/- resultantly it has led to net income of Rs. 3,30,68/- with aggregate tax liability of Rs. 1,07,203/- upon the assesse. 3. Aggrieved by the above order, assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A). However, same was dismissed. Dissatisfied with the above order, assessee preferred appeal before this Tribunal raising multiple grounds of appeal before this Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, ld. A/R submitted before the Bench that the revised computation of income alleging that the calculation arrived by CPC was wrong and due to this, there would be no tax liability upon the assessee. To substantiate his claim, ld. A/R submitted before us that income from house property as calculated by CPC of Rs.8,08,956/-, then also assessee’s income is below basic tax exemption limit of Rs.2.5 Lakhs and no tax liability is envisaged since it is a Private Trust. Here in the case of assessee if house property income is taken into consideration at Rs.8,08,956/- in that event cumulative deduction @30% would be Rs.2,42,686/- then also income from house property would be Rs.5,66,269/- and assessee also declared business net loss of Rs.3,44,510/- by setting off which net income comes upto Rs.2,31,769/- only which is below basic tax limit of Rs.2.5 Lakhs as prescribed under Act. Therefore, no tax liability is envisaged upon the assessee and, therefore, order passed by the CPC u/s 143(1) requires to be set aside. I.T.A. No. 596/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Amitabh Jalan Family Trust 3 5. We after hearing rival contentions and the material placed before us, find force in the contention made by ld. A/R of the assessee regarding the calculation made by the assessee to substantiate its claim. In the present case, CPC assessed the income of the assessee u/s 143(1). While doing so, the CPC did not consider the cumulative deduction @ 30% on such further addition of Rs.3,32,650/- and then revised addition made in the hands of the assessee it would arrived at Rs.2,21,760/- only and which is below the basic tax limit as prescribed under the law. We, therefore, find that in present facts circumstances of the case no tax liability would be caused to the assessee and accordingly. We set aside the intimation order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act and consequently the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 22 nd May, 2023 at Kolkata. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (SONJOY SARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 22/05/2023 *SC SrPs आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ)अपील (/ The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, 6. गाडᭅ फाई/ Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Kolkata