TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 1105
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: 1. The Learned CIT(A) erred in passing the order in the manner he has done and on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT (A) ought to have accepted the claims of the Appellant and allowed the appeal. 2. The addition in the intimation u/s 143(1) are without any grounds, and is not covered in any of the permitted adjustment u/s 143(1)(a), hence squarely covered within the scope of rectification u/s 154. The Learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in holding the additions as not ' mistake apparent on record' and not covered u/s 154, dismissing the Appeal. 3. The Learned CIT(A) is not justified in dismissing the appeal by upholding the order u/s 154 denying the HRA Exemption claimed u/s 10(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....apter VI A - Rs.94,000/-. 3. The above benefits were not granted to the assessee and assessed the income at Rs.17,16,560/-. The assessee filed rectification application against the intimation u/s 143(1)(a) which was disposed off by the CPC (Central Processing Centre) on 29.08.2019 and rejected the rectification filed by the assessee under section 154 of the Act. Aggrieved from the above order passed by the CPC, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A), after relying on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of T S Balaram, ITO Vs. Volkart Brothers (1971) reported in 82 ITR 40 (SC) dismissed the appeal of the assessee observing that the issues raised by the assessee are not covered under section 154 of the Act. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder. Accordingly, the CIT(A) was not justified for not accepting the claim of the assessee and the mistakes were apparent from the record. 6. On the other hand, the learned DR vehemently opposed the condonation petition filed by the assessee. The learned DR relied on the order of the lower authorities and submitted that the benefits claimed by the assessee is not covered under section 154 of the Act. Therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee and the issue requires verification as observed by the CIT(A). 7. During the course of hearing the ld. AR. dully explained the reason for delay for filling appeal as stated above. Accordingly, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 8. After hearing both the pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....A) has dismissed the appeal without deciding issues on merits of the case, which is wrong. On going through the Paper Book filed by the assessee in Form 16 which is placed at Page Nos. 38 to 40 of the Paper Book in which the value of perquisite under section 17(2) of the Act of Rs.12,335/- has been added into the income of the assessee whereas it has been twice considered by the CPC which is wrong. Therefore, the addition of Rs.12,335/- is to be deleted. In Form 16, the employer has also given exemption under section 10(13A) for HRA of Rs.1,03,772/- and employer has also granted deduction under Chapter VI A of Rs.1,16,429/- out of which Rs.94,000/- is breakup of LIC premium, unit linked insurance plan, housing loan principal repayment and e....