2020 (5) TMI 621 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal corrects FBT computation, reduces tax liability for assessee.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, directing the assessing officer to rectify the computation of Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) based on the ... Rectification petition u/s 154 - demand raised by the Ld AO under section 115WE - assessee value of fringe benefit tax shown is wrongly computed - HELD THAT:- The assessee is constantly saying that there is an error in the value of fringe benefits shown by the assessee in the income tax return of income in part C computation of fringe benefits and fringe benefit tax Apparently the total of four quarters is only ₹ 2 876308/– however the assessee has also put a figure of total of fringe benefits as 509560. Apparently there is an error apparent from the record. Either the total of ₹ 2876308/- is correct or actual value of total fringe benefits is ₹ 5 09560 is correct. Hence, there is an apparent error, which needs to be rectified. The central processing centre has taken the correct value of the fringe benefits automatically whereas it did not pay any heed to the figures mentioned of total fringe benefits of ₹ 5 09560. Naturally, there is an error in the return of income filed by the assessee apparently. Assessee cannot be asked to pay the tax on incorrect computation. He can be burdened with the tax liability only on the correct value of the fringe benefits. The assessee is saying that there is an error in input of figures of four quarters, which is the total of expenses and not the value of fringe benefit in those expenses. No infirmity in the request of the assessee. Merely because assessee has inserted some figures, which are not in coherence with the other figures in the income tax return, there is a mistake apparent from the record, which needs to be rectified. Thus, the lower authorities are not justified in rejecting the application under section 154 -direct the assessee to substantiate the correct figure for all the four quarters before the assessing officer, who is further directed to charge the correct fringe benefit tax payable by the assessee after proper verification - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. Issues:Appeal against CIT (A) order for Assessment Year 2007-08; Rectification petition u/s 154 of Income Tax Act; Correct computation of Fringe Benefit Tax; Mistake apparent from record; Adjustment of disputed demand with refunds; Charging of interest u/s 220(2) of Income Tax Act.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed against the order of the ld CIT (A) for the Assessment Year 2007-08. The assessee contended that the order passed by the CIT (A) was erroneous both in law and on facts. The main issue raised was the incorrect computation of Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) by the assessing officer, leading to a demand under section 115WE(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee argued that the figures provided in the return of income were wrongly calculated, resulting in an incorrect total amount for FBT. The rectification petition filed by the assessee under section 154 was rejected by the authorities, citing no mistake apparent from the record.2. The assessee maintained that the total value of FBT should be &8377; 5,09,560, but the authorities processed the return with a total of &8377; 2,87,6309. The rectification applications submitted by the assessee were dismissed by the assessing officer, who stated that the figures provided by the assessee in the return were the basis for processing. The contention was that there was a clerical mistake in the figures entered by the assessee, and the correct total of FBT should be &8377; 5,09,560, not &8377; 2,87,6309 as processed.3. The Tribunal analyzed the details provided by the assessee regarding the computation of FBT for each quarter and the total amount declared. It was observed that there was a discrepancy in the figures entered by the assessee, leading to an incorrect total value of FBT. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee's argument that there was an error apparent from the record, as the correct total should have been &8377; 5,09,560, not &8377; 2,87,6308. The Tribunal directed the assessing officer to verify and charge the correct FBT based on the accurate figures provided by the assessee for all four quarters.4. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, stating that the lower authorities had erred in rejecting the rectification application under section 154. It was emphasized that the correct computation of FBT was essential, and the assessee should not be burdened with tax liability based on incorrect figures. The Tribunal held that the mistake in the return of income was apparent and needed rectification to ensure the accuracy of the tax assessment. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, and the stay petition filed by the assessee was dismissed as infructuous.