TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1639
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment year (AY) 2011-12. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: "Ground 1 - On given facts, circumstances and provisions of the law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on the grounds that the rectification application of the assessee was time-barred. Such dismissal of the appeal is bad in law and the intimation order u/s 143(1) is liable to be rectified. Ground 2 - On given facts, circumstances and provisions of the law, the Ld. AO erred in dismissing the rectification application of the assessee on the grounds of limitation in spite of the fact that previous AO had agreed with the contentions of the assessee. Hence, in view of the said facts the intimation order u/s 143(1) is liab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not intentional and was beyond his control. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the Tribunal may decide the issue as it thinks fit. Considering the factual position as explained before us and keeping in view the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Collector, Land Acquisition v Mst. Katiji And Others-167 ITR 471 (SC), where it was held that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay, we condone the delay. 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee electronically filed return of income ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion is a narrow remedy confined to mistakes apparent from record. The enhancements in business income, tax computation, and interest require detailed examination and go beyond the permissible scope of section 154." 5.1 The CIT(A) also held that the AO acted within the mandate of section 154(7) of the Act. The limitation being absolute, the ground of appeal was dismissed. The CIT(A) has also dismissed the other grounds of appeal. 6. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR submitted that the intimation under which adjustment has been made does not specify the nature of addition or adjustment made and further it denies credit of tax paid despite the same being already reflected in Form....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evant for computing limitation period. 7. On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the order of lower authorities. 8. We have heard both sides and perused the materials on record. There is no dispute regarding the fact that the appellant filed application for rectification u/s 154 of the Act on 01.07.2019 though the intimation u/s 143(1) was made on 15.01.2012. The CIT(A) has referred to provisions of section 154(7) of the Act and held that where the limitation had expired, the AO cannot assume rectificatory jurisdiction after expire of 4 years. The Ld. AR has contended that the appellant had not received the intimation u/s143(1) of the Act and hence, he could not file the rectification petition within the time from the date of suc....