SUDHAKAR DEVIDAS TARALE,AKOLA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-AKOLAITO BUILDING,AKOLA, AKOLA, AKOLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 152/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 May 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had correctly disclosed income under various heads in the Profit and Loss account and the return. The enhancement by the CPC was due to a mistake in filing the return, leading to income being taxed twice.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an income tax return claiming set off of brought forward loss. The CPC allowed the set off but simultaneously enhanced business income by Rs. 7,10,020/-. The assessee contended this was double taxation due to errors in filling the return.

What were the issues?

Whether the enhancement of business income by the CPC amounted to double taxation due to errors in the income tax return filing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 28

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR ‘SMC’ BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Adv. Abhishek Kumar
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Hearing: 20.03.2026Pronounced: 12.05.2026

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 30.12.2025 framed by Addl/JCIT(A)-3, Chennai (NFAC) arising out of Intimation Order dated 09.05.2024 passed u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

The only effective issue for my consideration is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer enhancing the business income by Rs.7,10,020/- while processing the Rectification Application filed by the assessee.

3.

I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that assessee furnished the return of income for A.Y.2017-18 on 29.10.2017. In this return,

2 Sudhakar Devidas Tarale

assessee has claimed set off of brought forward loss of Rs.77,904/- which has been denied by CPC. Further, assessee moved Rectification Application and CPC after considering the application allowed the set off the brought forward loss Rs.77,904/- but simultaneously enhanced the business income by Rs.7,10,020/-.

4.

Before me, the main contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee is that CPC has made double addition because the income under respective heads is already offered to tax. But due to mistake in filling columns of the income tax return has given rise to the impugned addition. I note that the assessee has furnished detailed submissions which reads as follows:

“1. It is most humbly submitted that the ld. AO has carried out a rectification under sec.154 whereby business and profession income was increased by Rs.7,10,020/-.

2.

It is stated that in the Audited Profit and Loss A/c of the appellant (Annexure-1) it can be seen that the appellant has included following items as income:- S.No. Particulars Amount 1 Dividend 23750 2 Rent 464378 3 Saving Bank Interest 2860 4 Interest from Capital in Firm 183203 5 Salary from partnership firm 56392 6 Profit from partnership firm 18988 Total 749571

3.

It is most humbly submitted that the appellant has routed these items through its profit and loss account. Thus, the net profit comes to Rs.5,87,881/-.

4.

The sum of Rs.5,87,881/- is disclosed by the appellant in its return of income at Schedule BP: Computation of income from business or profession, page 19 of the ITR. Further, the appellant has deducted salary of Rs.56,392/- and other source to the tune of Rs.6,71,331/-and thus the balance comes to Rs.1,58,830/-. The break-up of Rs.6,71,331/- comes as follows:-

3 Sudhakar Devidas Tarale

S.No. Particulars Amount 1 Dividend 23750 2 Rent 464378 3 Interest from Capital in Firm 183203 Total 6,71,331/-

5.

Further, at page 21, point no. 21 the appellant disclosed an income of 2,36,735/- (i.e. Salary of Rs. 56,392/- and interest from capital in firm as Rs. 1,83,203/- (-) Rs. 2860/-).

6.

Therefore, on the sum of Rs. 56,392/ as salary and sum of Rs. 1,80,343/- (183203-2860) are duly disclosed in the ITR as per Sec 28 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 7. Further, the remaining heads (other than Salary and Interest) is disclosed in the ITR as follows:- Sr. Particulars Amount No. 1 Profit from 18988 Exempt Income disclosed at partnership firm Item No. 5 at page 20 of ITR. 2 Dividend on 23750 Exempt income shown in shares Schedule El: Details of Exempt Income (Income not to be included in Total Income) page 42 of ITR. 3 Rent 464378 Shown under Schedule HP: Details of Income from House Property at page 19 of ITR. 4 Interest Income 2860 Shown under 3 Part CA and D- Deduction in respect of other incomes/other deduction at page 40 of ITR. 5 Depreciation 41332 Duly shown at page 26 of ITR.

8.

Therefore, where the appellant has truly and fairly disclosed his incomes in the ITR, there increasing the business and profession income by Rs. 7,10,020/ amounts to double taxation and incorrect appreciation of facts.”

5.

I have gone through the above submissions and also considering the submissions filed by the ld. DR. I have also gone through the income tax return placed at pages 1 to 45 of the paper book. On perusal of the Profit and loss account and computation of income from pages 46 to 50 of the paper book, I find that contents of the submissions are correct and that 4 Sudhakar Devidas Tarale

while filling the return the assessee has to take up the basis of net profit as in the profit and loss account and then has to reduce the income which are taxable under other heads like rent, dividend, bank interest, etc. and due to mistake in filing the return, the income has been taxed twice. I therefore set aside the finding of ld. CIT(A) and delete the impugned addition of Rs.7,10,020/- wrongly made by CPC. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced on this 12th day of May, 2026. (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Nagpur/ दिन ांक / Dated : 12th May, 2026. Satish

Satish Kumar Madishetty आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

2.3.

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, न गपुर SMC बेंच, 4. न गपुर / DR, ITAT, “Nagpur SMC Bench, Nagpur ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

////

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →