MRS. BABU SHEENY,CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW-6(1), CHENNAI

ITA 3206/CHNY/2024

AI Insights

The case revolves around an appeal by Mrs. Babu Sheeny against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the additions made by the CPC, Bangalore to her declared income for the assessment year 2021-22. The additions pertained to various incomes such as rent, bank interest, and dividends, which the assessee had already disclosed in her tax return under appropriate heads. The primary contention was that these incomes were erroneously added again under the head 'business income' by the CPC, leading to double taxation. The Tribunal examined the tax audit report and the income tax return filed by the assessee, which clearly showed that these incomes were not credited to the Profit & Loss account but were declared under specific heads. The Tribunal concluded that the additions made were erroneous and directed the deletion of these additions from the assessee's income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 472166 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAUTHAMI MANIVASAGAM
• Assessee Lawyers: K. RAVI
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ ᭠यायपीठ, चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI ᮰ी जॉजᭅ जॉजᭅ के, उपा᭟यᭃ एवं ᮰ी एस.आर.रघुनाथा, लेखा सद᭭य के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.R. RAGHUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 3206/Chny/2024 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Mrs. Babu Sheeny, New No. 719, Old No. 666, T.H. Road, Thiruvottiyur, Chennai – 600 019. [PAN: AAWPS-4485-R] v. The Income Tax Officer, Non Corporate Ward -6(1), Chennai – 600 034. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : Mr. K. Ravi, CA ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Gauthami Manivasagam, JCIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19.02.2025 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2025 आदेश /O R D E R PER S. R. RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl/JCIT(A), Mysore, dated 28.10.2024 and pertains to assessment year 2021-22. 2. The only issue involved in this appeal is as regards to Ld.Addl/JCIT(A) erred in indirectly confirming the additions of :-2-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 Rs.6,35,286/- without appreciating the fact that the said income have already been disclosed by the assessee while filing the return of income. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual and a proprietor carrying on business. For the assessment year 2021-22 the assessee filed her return of income on 05.02.2022 declaring a total income of Rs.7,57,750/-. Later, the return of income processed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by the CPC, Bangalore dated 05.07.2022 by making an addition of Rs.6,35,286/- to its returned income on account of the following: Rent received - Rs.5,74,584/- SB bank interest – Rs.29,686/- Chit Kasar - Rs.25,353/- Dividend - Rs.5,606/- FDR Interest - Rs.5/- Income tax refund int - Rs.52/- Total - Rs.6,35,286/- The assessee filed rectification application u/s. 154 of the Act and had requested to reprocess the return of income stating that these income have been offered under the head income from house property and income from other sources already :-3-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 and hence, disallowance amounts to double taxation of the same. Apart from that, the assessee also filed a grievance on 23.07.2022 in the income tax website. Since, the CPC, Bangalore did not consider the rectification application and no result was received from the grievance, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. Addl/JCIT(A). 4. Before the ld. Addl/JCIT(A), the assessee stated that this amount of Rs.6,35,286/- which has been shown in column 16(d) of Form 3CD certified by the CA in his tax audit report have already been offered as income from house property and other source and hence, the same has been shown as “income not credited to P&L account”. Therefore, addition made by the CPC, Bangalore on this amount is erroneous and hence, prayed for deleting the same. After perusal of the submissions made by the assessee, the ld. Addl/JCIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his order dated 28.10.2024 stating that no evidence has been filed by the assessee. Aggrieved by the ld. Addl/JCIT(A) order, the assessee is before us. 5. The ld.AR for the assessee stated that the assessee’s books of accounts have been audited by CA and return has :-4-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 been filed along with tax audit report. The ld.AR filed a copy of the income tax return acknowledgment for the assessment year 2021-22 along with detailed computation of income showing the details of income from business and also income from house property and income from other source. The ld.AR also filed the tax audit report in Form 3CA & 3CD duly certified by the CA. The ld.AR took us through the column 16(d), wherein the auditor has mentioned ‘amounts not credited to P&L account being any other item of income’ Rent received - Rs.5,74,584/- SB bank interest – Rs.29,686/- Chit Kasar - Rs.25,353/- Dividend - Rs.5,606/- FDR Interest - Rs.5/- Income tax refund int - Rs.52/- 6. Further, the above said item wise income had been declared under income from house property to the extent of Rs.5,74,584/- and Rs.60,702/- under the head income from other source. Further, the ld.AR stated that since the income of Rs.6,85,286/- has already been offered as income in the income tax returns filed by the assessee, the adjustment made by the CPC, Bangalore and confirmed by the ld. Addl/JCIT(A) amounts to double taxation of the same and hence, prayed for :-5-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 deleting the same by setting aside the order of the ld. Addl/JCIT(A). 7. Per contra, the ld.Sr.DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 8. We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has filed return of income for the assessment year 2022-23 along with the tax audit report duly certified by the CA by declaring the income from house property, business and other source. On perusal of tax audit report column 16(d) “amount not credited to the P&L account being any other item of income” the CA has mentioned Rs.6,85,286/- by way of rent received and other income earned by the assessee during the assessment year. The CPC, Bangalore in its intimation u/s. 143(1)(a) has made an addition of the same under the head business even though these items have already been considered and offered to tax under the head income from house property and income from other sources. Therefore, the CPC, Bangalore as well as the ld. Addl/JCIT(A) have erred in making an addition of :-6-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 Rs.6,85,286/- to the returned income of the assessee. In the present facts and circumstances of the case, addition confirmed by the ld. Addl/JCIT(A) is not sustainable and hence, we are inclined to delete the same by setting aside the order of the ld. Addl/JCIT(A)and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the same by accepting the returned income of the assessee. 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the court on 21st February, 2025 at Chennai. Sd/- (जॉजŊ जॉजŊ क े) (GEORGE GEORGE K) उपाȯƗ /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (एस. आर. रघुनाथा) (S. R. RAGHUNATHA) लेखा सद˟/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 21st February, 2025 JPV आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथŎ/Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ/Respondent 3.आयकर आयुƅ/CIT – Chennai 4. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध/DR 5. गाडŊ फाईल/GF :-7-: ITA. No: 3206/Chny/2024 "