SMT. MAMTA RATHI, Indore V. THE ITO 3(1), Indore

ITA 714/IND/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5811 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MOHD JAVED
• Keywords: Revised return

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI D.T. GARASIA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SMT. MAMTA RATHI, 408, SECTOR-D, SCHEME NO.74, INDORE PAN: ACZPR8941A VS. ITO, 3(1), INDORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI RAM GILDA, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SHRI MOHD. JAVED, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 22.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 22.08.2016 O R D E R PER O.P. MEENA, ACCOUTANT MEMEBR. THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE OR DER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-I, INDORE [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)] DATED 13.04.2016 AND PER TAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 AS AGAINST APPEAL DECIDED I N ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.08.2011OF ITO WARD 3(1), INDORE [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE AO]. I.T.A. NO.714/IND/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 SMT. MAMTA RATHI VS. ITO WD.3(1), INDORE I.T.A.NO . 714/IND/2016 AY 2007-08 P AGE 2 OF 5 2. THERE IS ONLY ONE GROUND WHICH SAYS THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAVE GROSSLY ERRED IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION AT RS. 4,63,245/- AGAINST THE ACTUAL/RETURN INCOME OF RS. 2,25,169/- EVEN AFTER THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL . 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DEALS IN SHARES AND SECURITIES AND ALSO HA VING INCOME FROM LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN AND INCOME FROM SPECULATIVE TRANSACTION. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED E-R ETURN OF INCOME ON 29.10.2007 VIDE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT NO.4962880291007 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS. 4,6 3,245/-. THE AO ACCEPTED THE SAME WITHOUT MAKING ANY ADDITION THEREON. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH THIS, THE ASSESSEE FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) STATING THAT THERE WAS ERROR IN TH E ASSESSMENT ORDER IN MENTIONING THE RETURNED INCOME. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME, TOTAL INCOME DECLARED WAS RS. 2,2 1,168/-, BUT THE AO HAS ASSESSED THE INCOME AT RS. 4,63,245/ -. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) OBSERVED THAT THE AO HAS AC CEPTED THE RETURNED INCOME AT RS. 4,63,245/-. THE CASE RECORDS WERE SMT. MAMTA RATHI VS. ITO WD.3(1), INDORE I.T.A.NO . 714/IND/2016 AY 2007-08 P AGE 3 OF 5 CALLED FOR AND AS PER THE RECORDS, GROSS TOTAL INCO ME WAS AT RS. 5,63,245/-. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF R S. 1 LAKH AND THE NET TAXABLE INCOME WAS AT RS. 4,63,245/-. HO WEVER, ON INSISTING THE AIR COPY WAS OBTAINED AND INSIDE TH E RETURN OF INCOME, THE TOTAL INCOME WAS SHOWN AT RS. 2,25,168 /- ONLY. HOWEVER, DUE TO SOME TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR, IT WAS WRIT TEN AS RS. 4,63,245/- ON FIRST PAGE OF THE RETURN OF INCOM E. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD AND IF THERE WAS A MISTAKE, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE FILED REVISED RETURN WITHIN THE TIME ALLOWED. ACCORDINGLY, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBU NAL AND REPEATED THE SAME ARGUMENTS AS TAKEN BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THE LD. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF T HE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT I.T.A.T. VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 0 9.07.2010 REFERRED THE CASE BACK TO THE AO TO ASSESS THE CASE AFRESH. HOWEVER, THE AO HAS ASSESSED THE SAME AT RS. 4,63,2 45/- EVEN AFTER DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL. SMT. MAMTA RATHI VS. ITO WD.3(1), INDORE I.T.A.NO . 714/IND/2016 AY 2007-08 P AGE 4 OF 5 6. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO CONCURRED WITH THE VIEW OF TH E AO. 7. THE LD. SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS AND PERUSED THE MATERI AL ON RECORD. IT IS SEEN THAT I.T.A.T. VIDE I.T.A.NO. 391/IND/2010 (A.Y.2007-08) DATED 09.07.2010 HAS OBSERVED THAT IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERITS OF THE CAS E, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND D ECIDE THE SAME AFRESH AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE AN OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE IS AT LIBE RTY TO FURNISH EVIDENCE, IF ANY, IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM. WE FIND FROM THE FRESH ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.08.2011 THAT AS PER THE DIRECTION OF THE TRIBUNAL, THE ASSESSEE WAS ASKED T O SUBSTANTIATE ITS STAND ON THE INCOME AS SHOWN IN THE RETURN, IN RESPONSE TO WHICH THE DETAILED REPLY GIVING RECO NCILIATION OF PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, COMPUTATION OF INCOME AND SPECULATIVE GAINS OF LOSS AND CALCULATION OF GROSS PROFIT AND AFTER GOING THROUGH THE SAME, THE AO NOTED THAT THE INCOME IS MENTIONED AT RS. 4,63,245/- IN THE COPY OF RETURN F ILED AND SMT. MAMTA RATHI VS. ITO WD.3(1), INDORE I.T.A.NO . 714/IND/2016 AY 2007-08 P AGE 5 OF 5 THERE IS NO EXISTENCE OF ANY BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES IN THE ORIGINAL RETURN FILED. THEREFORE, THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISREGARDED. THE AO ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE CAS E OF GOETZ INDIA LIMITED, 284 ITR 323 (S.C.). WE ARE ALSO OF T HE VIEW THAT IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID DECISION, THE CLAIM F OR ANY DEDUCTION CAN BE CONSIDERED IF THE ASSESSEE FILES T HE REVISED RETURN OF INCOME. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO MERITS IN TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL ON THIS GROUN D IS DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. THE ORDER HAS BEEN PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE 22 ND AUGUST, 2016. SD/- (D.T.GARASIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (O.P.MEENA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 22 ND AUGUST, 2016. CPU*