SAGAR NAMDEO NIVGUNE,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2263/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer to consider the assessee's claim for depreciation, directing them to allow the eligible claim as per law, irrespective of any errors in the uploaded return. The appeal against the Section 154 order was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed depreciation on certain items in their income tax return, but due to an inadvertent error in uploading the depreciation chart, the claim was partially disallowed. Both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be allowed depreciation claim despite an error in uploading the depreciation chart, and the validity of a Section 154 order in light of the main issue being restored.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Bharat Kumar, AR
For Respondent: Shri Anil Gupta, DR
Hearing: 19.05.2022Pronounced: 19.05.2022

O R D E R 01. The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders dated 29.09.2021 & 28.09.2021 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) respectively.

2.

First, we take the assessee’s appeal in . The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee in the income-tax return had claimed depreciation on certain items, however, due to some inadvertence; the depreciation chart could not be filled up. At the time of processing of return, due to the mismatch in the claim of the depreciation, the depreciation to some extent was disallowed to the assessee. The assessee carried the matter in appeal to the learned CIT (A), however, The learned CIT (A) also confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer.

4.

Before this Tribunal, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the matter may be remanded to the file of the learned Assessing Officer so that the assessee may show about the arithmetical error committed while uploading the return so that the assessee maybe allowed the claim of depreciation as per his entitlement as per law.

5.

The learned Departmental Representative has not objected to the same.

6.

In view of this, matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to consider the claim of the assessee regarding the depreciation, irrespective of the fact that there was any error in the uploaded return and allowing the assessee the eligible claim as per the entitlement of the assessee as per law.

7.

This is an appeal of the assessee on the same issue whereby, the assessee had sought to rectify the assessment order by way of moving an application under section 154 of the Act, which was rejected by the lower authorities. Since, the issue has been restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer as per observation made above, therefore, the present appeal of the assessee against the order passed under section 154 of the Act has become infractuous and the same is dismissed, accordingly.

8.

In the Result, appeal of the assessee being is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19.05.2022.

More judgments on Section 154

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →