TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1107
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sted that the impugned order rejecting the application dated 01.09.2018 be quashed and set aside 3. Rs 31,06,910: The Id. CIT(A) erred in law and on the facts of the case by confirming the action of the DCIT, CPC, in rejecting the claim of the assessee that the salary income of Rs. 3,10,691/- was incorrectly reported as Rs. 31,06,910/- due to a clerical error when filing the ROI us 139(1). However, the DCIT, CPC, wrongly assessed the salary income at Rs 31,06,910/-, instead of the correct amount of Rs 3,10,691/-. This assessment is contrary to the provisions of law and the facts of the case. Therefore, it is regarded that the impugned order be quashed.'' 2.1 Apropos grounds of appeal, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay of 563 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). The narration so made by the ld. CIT(A) as to dismissal of appeal is reproduced as under:- ''In form 35 the date of service of intimation u/s 143(1) of I. T.Act is mentioned as 09.10.2018 and further the appeal has been finally filed after 563 days on 22.03.2020, which is after the due date as per law No credible ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing of matters on 'merits'. The expression sufficient cause employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable the Courts to apply the law in a meaningful manner which sub serves the ends of justice-that being the life-purpose of the existence of the institution of Courts. It is common knowledge that this Court has been making a justifiably liberal approach in matters instituted in this Court. But, the message does not appear to have percolated down to all the other Courts in the hierarchy." 2. Hosanna Ministries vs ITO (2017) DTR 0008 (Mad) has observed as under:- "Appeal (Tribunal) Condonation of delay Reasonable cause-Delay of 1902 days in filing appeal against CIT's order under s. 12AA was, as explained by assessee, on account of non-advise on the part of the professional, who has been engaged by the assessee and the ignorance of law by the assessee itself Assessee knew well that if a plea of ignorance of law is taken, that would be, on face of it, rejected by court/Tribunal, nevertheless, such a plea alone had been taken by the assessee and that itself would show the inherent genuineness attached with the reason cited by the assessee for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....्र दिनांक 17.01.2020 के संदर्भ में लेख है कि आपके मामलें में नि.य. 2017-18 की आयकर विवरणी का रिकॉर्ड CPC Banglore के द्वारा इस कार्यालय को स्थानातरण नहीं किया गया है। जैसा कि आपने बताया कि आप द्वारा पूर्व में दिनांक 07.08.2018 को भूल सुधार (Rectification) हे....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt of details of Salary Paid and any other income and tax deducted.. Because of misfortune of the assessee, at the time of filling ROI put extra 0 after the amount i.e. Rs. 31,06,910/-. However, the actual salary was earned by the assessee was only Rs. 3.10.691/. In support of the same. we are enclosing herewith copy of Form-16 and statement of detailed Salary issued by KDK is enclosed herewith. 2. No such income was earned by the assessee in the past nor in future: It is pertinent to note that in the past i.e. In AY. 2015-16 and in A.Y. 2016-17, the assessee was employee in the Channel Technologies (P) Ltd. New Delhi and earned net salary of Rs. 1.37612/- in A.Y. 2015-16 (PB 1-2) and Rs. 2.17.919/- in A.Y 2016-17 (PB 3-4). Similarly, in A.Y. 2018-19, the M/s K.D.K. Softwares India Pvt. Ltd. Jaipur and earned Gross salary of Rs. 3.13.594/- (PB 5-9). Thus, the assessee never earned such a huge salary in the past, as also in the later year. It was only an unintended mistake could happen that even though the assessee had declared incorrect figure income of salary The AO principally agreed that the assessee due to inadvertent mistake put wrong figure of salary however....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a of huge Salary: One Important aspect to be considered is that the assessee is maintaining account with HDFC Bank Ltd (PB 10-19). A bare perusal of the same clearly shows that there was total deposits in the bank during the year was only of Rs. 7,73,655/- (which includes cheque deposits from relatives and salary of Rs. 3,10,691/-) and not Rs. Rs. 31,06,910/- as was assessed by the CPC, Bangaluru u/s 143(1). Thus, there was no lota of evidence to support that assessee earned such a huge salary during the year. It was the duty of the AO to assist the tax payer in a reasonable way and to provide the relief if due to the assessee. 4. Income liable to be taxed has to be worked out: It is further submitted that the assessee filed rectification letter before the TO-5(4), who was the jurisdictional AO and stated as under: "In The matter referred above. I am a salary Parson and I filed my Income Tax returns on 05 August 2017 for the assessment year 2017-18 Due to typing mistake put wrong income entered in the salary column "b". Put 3106910.00 instead of Rs310691.00 that was my 1st experience I didn't know what I did wrong in that return. After getting mail I got to kn....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. During the year under consideration, the assessee had earned salary of Rs. 3,10,691/- but due to typographical error, the amount was mentioned in the return of income as Rs. 31,06,910/- instead of Rs. 3,10,691/-. The same was assessed vide intimation dated 07-08-2018 u/s 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the assessee filed rectification request on 01-09-2018 u/s 154 of the Act but the same was rejected by the Department. The assessee further filed rectification request before the AO, ITO, Ward 5(4), Jaipur who also rejected the same vide his order 24-01-2020 stating that CPC Bangalore has not transferred the record and hence rectification is not possible. The narration of the ITO, Ward 5(4), Jaipur is as under:- उपरोक्त संबंध में आपके पत्र दिनांक 17.01.2020 के संदर्भ में लेख है कि आपके मामलें में नि.य.....