TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 772
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a NRI. For the assessment year 2012- 2013, return of income was filed on 08.08.2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 11,51,96,230. The return of income consists of the following:- (i) Income from house property Rs. 1,76,807 (ii) Long term capital gain Rs.11,44,73,010 (iii) Income from other sources Rs. 5,46,410 Total income returned Rs.11,51,96,230 3.1 The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 28.03.2015. The total income assessed was Rs. 11,67,98,280. 3.2 The assessee filed an appeal to the first appellate authority contending that the long term capital gain computed by the assessee was mistake. According....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Rs. 10 way back in the financial year 2006-2007. The assessee has also placed on record RBI confirmation of assessee's investment of 2 lakh shares of value of Rs. 20 lakh in the company M/s.Agnice Fire Protection Limited. Form No.2 as regards the allotment of shares is also furnished. The learned Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A). It was contended that it is only an inadvertent mistake and same should have been corrected by the CIT(A). It was submitted that this inadvertent mistake has resulted in overstating of capital investment by a sum of Rs. 27,22,543. 5. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, supported the first appellate authority's order. 6. We have heard the ri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....be just and fair in determining the tax liability. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. Sam Global Securities Ltd. (2014) 360 ITR 682 has held that assessment proceedings are not adversarial in nature. If any mistake is found in the computation filed by the assessee, it is the lawful obligation cast on the Assessing Authority to correct it. It is immaterial, whether such correction benefits the assessee or Revenue. 6.3 In a case, Rachna S Talreja V s. DCIT (Mum) (T), considered by ITAT, assessee during the course of assessment proceedings filed revised computation of income and claimed additional deduction in respect of payment of interest. Assessing Authority refused to consider the revised claim on the ground that the assesse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cer to refrain from assessing an non-taxable income returned by the assessee on mistaken understanding. The relevant observation of the Hon'ble High Court reads as follows:- "11. It is beyond dispute that the powers of the Assessing Officers under the Act are quasi-judicial in nature and they are duty-bound, therefore, to act fairly in the discharge of their functions. They are also invested with the authority to do justice to the assessees. True, in a given case where the self- assessment made by an assessee is proposed to be revised on the ground that the deduction made by him in the return under a particular head is inadmissible, the Assessing Officer, in the absence of a revised return, would proceed on the basis of the facts d....