TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (7) TMI 729
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls) XIV, Ahmedabad has erred both in law and on facts of the case in framing appellate order u/s.250 of the I.T.Act for A.Y. 2007-2008 on 24th June, 2011. (2) The Learned CIT(A)-XIV, Ahmedabad has erred in upholding action of the Assessing Officer that of rejecting rectification application u/s.154 of the I.T.Act. (3) Your appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, omit all or any of the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard and decided. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the assessee had filed its return of income declaring total returned income of Rs. 71,91,960/- and the same was processed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on 01/09/2008. Subsequently, the assessee filed an appl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....even if there is a mistake on the part of the assessee in the return of income, that mistake can be rectified by invoking the provisions of section 154 of the Act. The ld.counsel for the assessee placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi rendered in the case of Pawan Kumar Aggarwal vs. CIT in ITA No.199/2014 dated 06/05/2014 and the decision of the Coordinate Bench (ITAT Kolkata Bench 'B') rendered in the case of DCIT vs. Justice Dilip Kumar Seth reported at (2006) 98 ITD 241 (Kol.) 4.1. On the contrary, ld.Sr.DR submitted that there is no illegality in the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that the assessee has not pointed out any mistake apparent from the order of the AO. He placed reliance on the ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....judicial decisions in support of his claim. I have carefully perused the decisions, but the facts of those decisions are distinguishable. In one case (225 .ITR 348), the issue involved was claim of investment allowance whereas in other case, it was regarding the claim of 80IA and 80HHD. The other decision mentioned by him [280 ITR (AT) 248] is also not applicable as this mistake that has been committed by the appellant is not in the statement of income. It has been committed by him in the audited accounts which has been certified and approved by the Directors. Had the mistake been there in the statement of income, it could have been corrected by the Assessing Officer as he had all the powers to correct the same, but he cannot go back to the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier. The return so filed is required to be processed as per section 143(1) which reads as under:- "Where a return has been made under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, such return shall be processed in the following manner, namely:- (a) the total income or loss shall be computed after making the following adjustments, namely:- (i) any arithmetical error in the return; or (ii) an incorrect claim, if such incorrect claim is apparent from any information in the return." 5.4. As per section 143(1)(b), the tax and interest, if any, shall be computed on the basis of the total income computed under clause (a) and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in section 116 may, - (a) amend any order passed by it under the provisions of this Act; [(b) amend any intimation or deemed intimation under subsection (I) of section 143.]] [(IA) Where any matter has been considered and decided in any proceeding by -way of appeal or revision relating to an order referred to in sub-section (1), the authority passing such order may, notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, amend the order under that sub-section in relation to any matter other than the matter which has been so considered and decided.] (2) Subject to the other provisions of this section, the authority concerned- (a) may make an amendment under sub-section (1) of its own motion, and (b) shall make....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ITAT Kolkat Bench 'B') rendered in the case of Dy.CIT vs. Justic Dilip Kumar Seth reported at (2006) 98 ITD 241 (Kol.), wherein the Hon'ble Coordinate Bench following the judgement of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Premier Polymers (P.) Ltd. reported at (1992) 107 CTR 310 and also the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. D.P.Sandhu Bros., Chembur (P.Ltd. reported at (2005) 273 ITR 1::142 Taxman 713 (SC), has decided this issue by observing as under:- "19. In view of the above facts and circumstances and considering the decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Calcutta High Court, it is apparently clear that the above amount received by the assessee prior to his elevation could not be taxed ....