Case Law Details
Ranuj Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
Assessee has filed return of income declaring total income at Rs.32,01,050/-which was processed by the CPC, Bangalore under section 143(1) and assessed at Rs.37,66,259/-. In the scrutiny assessment under section 143(3), the ld.AO has taken the income of Rs.37,66,259/- assessed under section 143(1) by the CPC as returned income, instead of returned income of Rs.32,01,050/- declared by the assessee in its original return. The ld.AO ought to have taken the figure of income declared by the assessee in the original return of income as “returned income” while computing the income under section 143(3) of the Act instead of “assessed income” under section 143(1) as “returned income”. Though a detailed submissions has been made by the assessee before the first appellate authority, but ld.CIT(A) without going into the merit of the contentions raised by the assessee, summarily and in a cryptic way rejected the same and confirmed order of the ld.AO. The ld.CIT(A) ought to have considered the pleadings of the assessee before him and should have passed an order on merit.
According to me the mistake is self-evident, and apparent from the record. For rectifying the mistake, the assessee filed rectification application under section 154, which was rejected by the AO on the ground that the same is barred by limitation. This foundational fact was not inquired into by both the authorities below in the course of rectification proceedings under section 154 of the Act, and simply dismissed the application on the ground of limitation.
The assessee submitted before the ld.CIT(A) that the assessee has filed application under section 154 on 20.1.2017 against the order passed under section 143(3) on 13.11.2012. Rectification of an order can be made within 4 years from the end of the financial year in which the order sought to be amended was passed, therefore, in the present case period for filing the application expires only on 31.3.2017, and therefore, application of the assessee under section 154 is within the limitation period.
As regards, the mistake pointed out by the ld.counsel for the assessee in the impugned assessment order is concerned, as stated above, is self-evident and apparent on face of the record, and thus, the lower authorities are not justified in rejecting the application under section 154 of the Act of the assessee. Hence, I allow appeal of the assessee and direct the ld.AO to consider the income declared by the assessee in its return of income, while computing assessed income under section 143(3) of the Act.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
