2021 (4) TMI 1003

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he facts relating to the issue are stated in brief. The assessee filed its return of income declaring Nil income on 20.9.2018 and the same was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 10.6.2019. In the computation of income, the assessee had claimed dividend income of Rs. 13.37 lakhs as exempt. However, the assessee omitted to fill the details of exempt in "Schedule-EI" in the Statutory return form prescribed for filing returns. It is pertinent to note that the assessee had mentioned that the dividend income of Rs. 13.37 lakhs is exempt in "Schedule BP" relating to computation of "income from business or profession". Hence, while processing return u/s 143(1) of the Act, the Centralised Processing Centre (CPC) did not grant exemption claimed by th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be allowed exemption claimed by it even though the same was not reported in schedule EI: a) Suman Chandra G. Mehta Vs. ITO (ITA No.564/Mum/2012 dated 24.1.2015). b) ACIT Vs. Rupam Impex (2016) 66 Taxman.com 181 (Raj.) The Ld. A.R. submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) was not correct in observing that the assessee has not responded to the deficiency pointed out by the CPC inviting our attention to page No.118 of the paper book, wherein copy of response given by the assessee is placed. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has duly responded to the discrepancy pointed out by the CPC but the same has not been taken into account while issuing intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act. 5. On the contrary, the Ld. D.R. submitted that the assessee has n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rocessing where adjustments have been correctly made during processing as per Sec.143(1)(a)(ii) of the Act. ........................... 7. The present case is a perfect example of such ignorance. The assessee has shown interest income earned as well as interest paid under the head "income from other sources". Not realizing the negative figure is not accepted by the server and therefore the interest paid shown as Rs. 2,33,535/- was rejected by the server while processing the return. 8. No doubt the CBDT has the powers to frame the rules but, at the same time, it cannot benefit from the ignorance of the taxpayers using the latest technology. We do not find any reason why such error should not be rectified by the AA.O. This is not ignora....