TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 32
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on a total income of Rs. 4,18,00,000/- as against the returned loss of a sum of Rs.1,32,893/- under the facts and circumstance of the case. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in upholding the addition of a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- made by the learned Assessing Officer in the rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the addition of a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- is already included in the addition made of a sum of Rs.3,88,00,000/- and consequently the same has resulted in double addition which is impermissible in law on the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in upholding the addition made of a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- despite holding that the Assessing Officer whether rightly or wrongly intended to make the addition on the facts and circumstances of the case. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in only adjudicating the issue of whether the addition of a sum of Rs. 30,00,000/- could be made in a proceedings under sect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich was duly granted. The assessee raised objections to the rectification notice issued by the A.O. However, the same was rejected and the A.O. passed order u/s 154 of the I.T.Act making an addition of Rs.30 lakh. The relevant finding of the A.O. in making the addition of Rs.30 lakh reads as follows:- "2.......... Assessee argument is not acceptable for the reason already discussed in para 5.3 of the assessment order. As per the audited annual report and financials, loan from M/s Motocab finance Pvt. Ltd. is Rs.3.88 cr. After one year, just before announcement of demonetisation, deposition of Rs.30,00,000/- is same as loan amount is not acceptable. Assessee has filed revised return & revised balance sheet only to accommodate the cash deposition made in F.Y.2016- 17. Hence, same was not accepted by assessing officer in order u/s 143(3)." 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the first appellate authority. Before the first appellate authority, the assessee raised contentions that there is no apparent mistake warranting rectification of assessment order u/s 154 of the I.T.Act. On the merits, it was submitted that the addition made amounting to Rs.30 lakh is already inc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appellant, he made the addition of Rs.3,88,00,000/- only and missed to make the addition of Rs.30,00,000/- which he had intended to treat as unexplained cash. So on the basis of material available on records it can be said that there was a mistake apparent from record and ongoing through the assessment order it cannot be said that two different opinions are possible. So the action of the AO in passing the rectification order under Section 154 of the Act is correct and the same is upheld." 5. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a paper book comprising of 78 pages inter alia enclosing therein copies of the original return, revised return, written submission filed before the CIT(A), confirmation from Motcab Finance Private Limited, copy of the Federal Bank statement, bank ledger account of M/s.Motcab Finance Private Limited, etc. The learned AR reiterated the submission made before the A.O. and the CIT(A). 6. The learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that order u/s 154 of the I.T.Act has been rightly passed, since there was a mistake apparent in the original order in not making addition of Rs.30 lakh. It is submitted b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the I.T.Act vide assessment order dated 22.12.2018. The addition made by the A.O. u/s 68 of the I.T.Act amounting to Rs.3.88 crore is pending adjudication before the CIT(A). Further, the AO passed rectification order making an addition of Rs.30 lakh. The contention of the assessee that increase in cash in hand by a sum of Rs.30 lakh was to correct the accounting error committed by the assessee's Accountant and the said sum was already included in the addition of Rs.3.88 crore made u/s 68 of the I.T.Act in assessment order completed on 22.12.2018, was rejected by the A.O. 10. The AO, during the course of assessment proceedings, had sought to make an addition of Rs.3.58 crore u/s 68 of the I.T.Act (the amount received by the assessee from Motcab Finance Private Limited) (refer para 4 of the assessment order). The assessee had replied that the cash in hand was mentioned at Rs.3,48,71,938 by inadvertence while filing the original return for the relevant assessment year. It was further stated by the assessee that later during October 2017 while reconciling the balance with various parties with whom the assessee had dealings, it was noticed that the....