AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 621
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case, the order passed by Ld CIT(A) is bad both in eyes of law and on facts. 2. That the Ld CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts confirming the demand raised by the Ld AO under section 115WE1 of Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2007-08 without considering the rectification petition u/s 154 of the Income Tax, 1961. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts by not considering the fact that bifurcation of the amount given in Part C of Computation of Fringe benefits and Fringe Benefit Tax on Fringe benefit tax value for each quarter of Rs. 6,93,986/-, Rs. 7,33,425/-, Rs. 8,14,860 and Rs. 6,34,037/- and not the assessable value of FBT. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....BT on 2876309/-. According to assessee, the figures of four quarters were entered wrongly in ITR. The assessee filed an application under section 154 of the income tax act on 16/8/2017 before the learned assessing officer stating that assessee value of fringe benefit tax shown at Rs. 2 876308 is wrongly computed instead of Rs. 5 09560/-. The learned assessing officer disposed of the rectification application of the assessee on 17 January 2018 stating that assessee has given value of fringe benefits for four-quarters which amounts to Rs. 2876309/-, however in the return of income it has been wrongly totaled at Rs. 5 09560/-. Therefore while processing the return of income on 30/10/2000 at the correct total amount of the fringe benefit val....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 of the income tax act rejecting the application of the assessee stating that assessee itself has accepted on 21/8/2017 that the wrong particulars were feed by it in the field return on account of clerical mistake on their part. The mistake was not rectified by it by filing a revised return within the due time. Thus, there being no mistake in processing by the Department. The learned assessing officer held that there is no mistake apparent from record warranting any amendment in the processing under section 115WE (1) on 30/10/2008 and rejected the rectification application of the assessee. 4. Therefore, the assessee filed an appeal against the order dated 17 January 2018 passed by the learned assessing officer under section 154 of the i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioned. Therefore, there is a mistake apparent from the record, Which needs to be rectified. He submitted that while processing the return of income the central processing centre has taken the correct total at Rs. 2876308/-, however the correct value of total fringe benefit is only Rs. 5 09560/-. He stated that assessee has wrongly entered the figures for first quarter to fourth-quarter. Even otherwise he submitted that the tax can be levied on the correct value of the fringe benefit which is shown at Rs. 5 09560. Therefore, there is an apparent mistake in the return of income, which needs to be rectified. He submitted that lower authorities have ignored this submission of the assessee and has merely gone on figures of the four quarters ins....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... benefits as 509560. Therefore, apparently there is an error apparent from the record. Either the total of Rs. 2876308/- is correct or actual value of total fringe benefits is Rs. 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 Rs. 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....