MANAS RAWAT,KOLKATA V. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1), , KOLKATA

ITA 2232/KOL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Manas Rawat, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which had dismissed his earlier appeal concerning the assessment year 2020-21. The primary issue was the alleged double addition of income reported under different heads in the income tax return. The assessee reported salary income under both 'Income from Salaries' and 'Business and Profession', leading to a demand of Rs. 29,94,578. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's claim of reporting mismatch and directed the AO to verify the details and pass a fresh order if the assessee's contentions were found correct.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 35980 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Business income; Revised return; Salary income
• Section: 119(2)(b)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “बी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 2232/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Manas Rawat (PAN: AJXPR 1507 M) Vs. ITO, Ward-50(1), Kolkata Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 07.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 30.01.2025 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Anuj Musaddi, A.R For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Shri Abhishek Kumar, Addl. CIT Sr. D.R ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-Addl/JCIT(A)-4, Chennai (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 19.09.2024 for AY 2020-21. 2 I.T.A. No. 2232/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Manas Rawat 2. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee filed its return of income for AY 2020-21. The return was processed and after process an addition of Rs. 51,42,248/- was made under business and profession raising a demand of Rs. 29,94,578/-. 3. Aggrieved by the intimation order assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee preferred an appeal before us. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee challenges the impugned order thereby submitting that the assessee had reported total salary income of Rs. 57,38,750/- , interest income of Rs. 1,53,494/-, dividend income of Rs. 1,482/- and commission income of Rs. 3/- in return of income under part A Profit and loss account but due to lack of knowledge the assessee has reported the said salary income under schedule income from salaries. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that the same was reported twice in the income tax return whereas the said income should ideally be reduced from the computation of business income as income offered to tax under head or income claimed as exempt. The counsel contended that this has resulted into double addition on the same items, income under the business and profession was taxed only due to reporting mismatch. The prayer of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that matter should be remitted back to the file to verify the same. 5. The Ld. D. R supports the impugned order. 6. We have perused the order of Ld. CIT(A) and find that the assessee has furnished the particulars of income and amount in its return of income which is as follows: Particulars Amount in Rs. Income from Salaries 24,38,750/- Income from Salaries 33,00,000/- Dividend income 1,482 3 I.T.A. No. 2232/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Manas Rawat Interest Income 1,53,494 Commission income 3 Total 58,93,729/- 7. The contentions of the assessee is that there has been double addition of the same items. We find that the assessee had earned income from salary, interest, commission and dividend only and there was no income from the business and profession for the year under consideration as the chart reveals as stated above. It further reveals that it was an error as claimed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has also held in its order that the same should have been rectified by filing revised return but the time barred for final return of income and only option available for the assessee to rectify the mistake is to file condonation for delay application to the CBDT u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act and to file the revised return to rectify the mistake. 8. Going over the record and finding of the Ld. CIT(A), we are inclined to restore the case of the assessee before the AO to verify the same and if the contentions of the assessee found to be correct afresh order should be passed. The order passed by the AO confirmed by the CIT(A) is hereby set aside. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 30th January, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 30th January, 2025 SM, Sr. PS 4 I.T.A. No. 2232/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Manas Rawat Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Manas Rawat, CB 54, Salt Lake, Kolkata-700064 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-50(1), Kolkata 3. Ld. CIT(A)-Addl/JCIT(A)-4, Chennai 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "