NIVRUTTI VISHNU PATIL,NALLASOPARA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER PNE-W-(72)(91), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4339/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 January 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had only granted a deduction of Rs. 44,282/- and no further deduction of Rs. 92,028/- was granted for arriving at the total income. Therefore, the AO was directed to delete the addition of Rs. 92,028/-.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income declaring Rs. 2,95,560/-, and the case was selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer (AO) passed an ex-parte order and disallowed the entire Chapter VIA deduction of Rs. 2,55,909/-. The CIT(A) allowed a deduction of Rs. 44,282/- but then made an addition of Rs. 92,028/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 92,028/- by the CIT(A) was justified when a deduction of Rs. 44,282/- was already granted, leading to a double addition.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 10

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH ‘H(SMC

Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON’BLE & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Bharat V. Kanakia
For Respondent: Shri Pravin Salukhe, Sr. DR
Hearing: 09.12.2024Pronounced: 17.01.2025

This appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 19.12.2023 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal), Addl/JCIT(A)-12, Delhi. The assessee has raised the following ground of appeal:

“In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in adding Rs. 92,028/- on account of excess deduction under Chapter VIA in spite of the fact that the deduction under Chapter VIA had been reduced to Rs. 44,282/- by already disallowing Rs. 92,028/- out of Rs. 1,36,310/- as claimed in the return of income.

The learned officer has thus added the same income twice once by reducing the claim deductions under Chapter VIA and then again by making a separate addition of Rs. 92,028/- to the income.”

Nivrutti Vishnu Patil A.Y. 2016-17 2. Fact in brief is that the assessee filed return of income declaring total income of Rs. 2,95,560/- and the case was subject to scrutiny assessment.

3.

During the course of assessment, the assessing officer asked the assessee to file relevant evidences in support of the aforesaid deduction claimed under Chapter VIA of the Act. However, the assessee has not made any compliance during the course of assessment proceedings, therefore, the assessing officer has passed ex-parte order u/s 144 of the Act and disallowed the whole amount of deduction claimed under Chapter VIA to the amount of Rs. 2,55,909/-.

4.

The assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) noticed that assessee was an employee of Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and as per form 16 issued his gross salary was Rs. 4,99,021/- after claiming exemption u/s 10 of Rs. 9,295/- and Rs. 2,700/- on account of professional tax and net salary was worked out to Rs. 4,87,026/-. The ld. CIT(A) has computed eligible deduction under Chapter VIA to Rs. 44,282/- only. The ld. CIT(A) has worked out the deduction under Chapter VIA of Rs. 44,282/- out of the gross total income of Rs. 4,87,026/- and arrived at the total income of Rs. 44,42,740/-. However, the ld. CIT(A) has again added excess deduction under Chapter VIA claimed by the assessee of Rs. 92,028/- and arrived at the total income of Rs./ 5,34,768/-. However, it is evident from the material facts as discussed that ld. CIT(A) has only granted deduction under chapter VIA of Rs. 44,282/- and no deduction of Nivrutti Vishnu Patil A.Y. 2016-17 Rs. 92,028/- was granted for arriving to the total income of Rs. 44,42,740/-, therefore, we direct the assessing officer to delete the addition of Rs. 92,028/- after necessary verification. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed subject to verification by the assessing officer.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17.01.2025

More judgments on Section 10

All 591 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →