Statutory surcharge on tax under section 115BBE can be rectified when omitted, even while the quantum appeal remains pending.

Surcharge omitted from the original computation of tax under section 115BBE was validly added by rectification under section 154 because it formed a statutory and consequential part of the assessed tax. The pending quantum appeal against the underlying section 68 addition did not invalidate the levy, since the surcharge would automatically stand adjusted if the assessed income changed in appeal. The rectification was therefore upheld as a permissible correction of an omitted consequential component, and the issue was decided against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the levy of surcharge under section 154 on tax computed at the enhanced rate under section 115BBE, when the quantum appeal against the underlying addition remained pending, was sustainable.

Analysis: The addition under section 68 had already been subjected to tax at the enhanced rate under section 115BBE. The only dispute in the present appeal was the surcharge of 25%, which was omitted in the original computation and was later brought in by rectification under section 154. The surcharge was treated as a statutory and consequential component of the tax computation, dependent on the eventual determination of income. It was also noted that if the quantum addition changed in appeal, the tax and surcharge would automatically stand adjusted.

Conclusion: The rectification levying surcharge was held to be valid, and the issue was decided against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed because the surcharge was treated as a consequential statutory adjustment to the tax already computed on the assessed income.

Ratio Decidendi: A surcharge that is a statutory and consequential part of the tax computation may be rectified under section 154 when it has been omitted, and its levy is not negated merely because the quantum appeal is pending.

---