TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (10) TMI 836
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:- "1. The learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in low and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 62,17,949) mode by the learned AO to the taxable income of the appellant, instead of declared income of Rs. 12,360/ 2. Appellant trust contends that the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in assessing total income of the appellant trust at Rs. 62,30,310/- Instead of Rs. 12,360/- declared in the return of income. 3. Appellant trust contends that Form 9A has been filed along with return of income and before due date u/s 139(4) of the ITA, 1961. And the appellant tried all modes of revision of Form 9A possible for it and in fact during the course of scrutiny assessm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....realizing the mistake of non-addition of depreciation, the assessee furnished revised Form no.9A and increased the income carry forward to an amount of Rs. 1 crore, and attempted to file the same electronically, but without any success. The assessee even tried to submit the same with the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, but again, without any success. 3. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 62,17,949, in the taxable income of the assessee. Due to non-cognizance of revised Form no.9A, by CPC-system and due to procedural constraints, the Assessing Officer did not grant benefit of additional carry-forward of income from Rs. 14 lakh to Rs. 1 crore. 4. When the assessee filed appeal before first appellate authority, the learned CIT(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m 10. But in the instant case, the AO has not rejected the form 9A furnished by the appellant but the revision of form 9A, Therefore, the fact situation being different in these case laws, the observations therein cannot be applied to the present facts. Further, the appellant trust has stated that they tried to revise Form 9A on IT portal, since no such option was available for online revision, they could not revise. This explanation of the appellant is not plausible for the reason that the details furnished in both ITR and form 9A are co-related, if they actually wanted to revise it they needed to revise both the ITR and form 9A. If they were not able to revise form 9A, they could have easily filed revised return revising the deta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue in hand. After taking all the facts and submission of the appellant into consideration, I find no reason to obviate from the view of the AO, therefore addition made the AO is sustained. 5.4.3 In view of the above discussion, ground no 2 and 3 of the appeal are dismissed. 5.5 Consequent to dismissal of ground no 2 and 3, Ground no 1 also stands dismissed 5.6 Ground no 4 being general in nature needs no separate adjudication. 6. In result, appeal of the appellant is dismissed." Consequent upon passing of the impugned order by the learned CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee could not point out any infirm....