SHRI HAZARI LAL MAURYA, JAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

ITA 850/JPR/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 126 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2200 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-01-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 16-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM ROY DCIT DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: KRISHNA KUMAR SAINI
• Section: 143(3); 154

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 850/JP/2017 FU/KZKJ.K O'KZ@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 HAZARI LAL MAURYA, V.P.O.- JODHPURA, VIA- PRAGPURA, TEHSIL-KOTPUTLI, JAIPUR (RAJ)-303107 CUKE VS. I.T.O., WARD 2(4), JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ADDPM 5040 L VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI KRISHNA KUMAR SAINI (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 17/01/2018 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18/01/2018 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. THIS IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES F ROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR DATED 04/08/2017 FOR THE A.Y. 2011-12. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) ON 15/4/2014 FOR MAKING A RECTIFICATION IN THE ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 27/12/2013. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION WAS REGARDING THE ITA 850/JP/2017_ HAZARI LAL MAURYA VS ITO 2 SALARY RECEIVED OF RS. 10,57,780/- FOR F.Y. 2010-11 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ON WHICH THE TDS OF RS. 1,45, 575/- WAS DEDUCTED. THE ASSESSEE ALSO RECEIVED ARREAR SALARY O F RS. 10,95,674/- FOR F.Y. 2006-07 TO 2009-10 ON WHICH TDS OF RS. 2,64, 146/- WAS DEDUCTED. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED RELIEF U/S 89(1) OF T HE ACT OF RS. 72,586/- IN HIS APPLICATION ENCLOSED IN FORM 10E. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CLAIM OF RELIEF U/S 89(1) OF THE ACT. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT ALLOWED THE RELIEF TO THE A SSESSEE FOR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVED ITS CLAIM U /S 89(1) OF THE ACT. 4. THE BENCH HAVE HEARD BOTH THE SIDES ON THIS ISSUE . THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED A CLAIM U/S 89 OF THE ACT IN FORM 10E . THE DETAILS WERE ANNEXED IN TABLE-A TO FORM 10E. THUS, THE ASSESSEE H AS SUBMITTED PRIMA FACIE DETAILS REGARDING THE RELIEF CLAIMED U/ S 89 OF THE ACT. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 89 OF THE ACT PROVIDES FOR RE LIEF THAT WHERE AN ASSESSEE IS IN RECEIPT OF A SUM IN THE NATURE OF SA LARY, BEING PAID IN ARREARS DUE TO WHICH HIS TOTAL INCOME IS ASSESSED AT A RATE HIGHER THAN THAT ON WHICH IT WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE BEEN ASSESSED A ND THE A.O. SHALL ON AN APPLICATION MADE TO HIM IN THIS BEHALF, GRANT SUCH RELIEF AS PRESCRIBED. THUS, IT IS AN OBLIGATION ON A.O. WHO SHA LL ALLOW THE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE ON AN APPLICATION MADE TO HIM IN THIS BEHALF AND GRANT ITA 850/JP/2017_ HAZARI LAL MAURYA VS ITO 3 SUCH RELIEF AS PRESCRIBED. THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED AP PLICATION ALONGWITH FORM 10E AS PRESCRIBED IN THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (IN SHORT THE RULES). THE A.O. DENIED THE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE F OR THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PROVIDED DETAILS OF RELIEF CLA IMED U/S 89 OF THE ACT IN A PRESCRIBED FORMAT AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. THE BENCH IS OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THIS IS A LEGAL CLAIM OF THE ASSESSE E AND THE ASSESSEE DESERVE SUCH RELIEF AS PER LAW AND THE A.O. IS BOUND BY LAW TO ALLOW THE SAME, IF IT IS FOUND IN ORDER. THEREFORE, CONSIDERI NG THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE F ILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTION THAT RELIEF U/S 89 OF THE ACT BE ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 81/01/2018. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ YS[KK LNL;@ YS[KK LNL;@ YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 18 TH JANUARY, 2018 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI HAZARI LAL MAURYA, KOTPUTLI, JAI PUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE I.T.O., WARD 2(4), JAIPUR. ITA 850/JP/2017_ HAZARI LAL MAURYA VS ITO 4 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 850/JP/2017) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR