GUJARAT AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPORATION,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 901/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 March 2025AY 2020-21Bench: the AO. The AO will verify the same. If the claim of the assessee is found to be justified, then no addition should be made, irrespective of the fact that the assessee has earlier declared higher income in the return of income.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 income tax authorities should assist assessees in correcting mistakes and not penalize bona fide errors. The lower authorities failed to exercise their jurisdiction properly.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Government Organization, filed its return of income based on provisional accounts. Later, audited accounts showed a lower income. The assessee requested assessment based on the actual audited income, but the AO refused, insisting on the higher income declared in the return.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO was justified in refusing to consider the assessee's audited accounts showing a lower income than originally declared, despite the assessee's plea of provisional income at the time of filing the return.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

In view of this, the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) is set aside. Matter is restored to file of the AO with direction to consider the averments made by the assessee regarding its actual/real income. The assessee will file the reconciliation statement, audited financial statements as well as computation of income vide which the income was provisionally computed, and bring out mistake/differences before the AO. The AO will verify the same. If the claim of the assessee is found to be justified, then no addition should be made, irrespective of the fact that the assessee has earlier declared higher income in the return of income.

8.

With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Court on 20th March, 2025 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (Makarand V. Mahadeokar) (Sanjay Garg) Accountant Member Judicial Member Ahmedabad,dated 20/03/2025 2 2. The Ld AO has erred in law as well as on the facts by adjusting a sum of Rs.1,50,000 pertaining to AY 2018-19 out of the refund of AY 2020-21, which has already been paid on 17/12/2021. Your appellant prays for a refund of Rs.1,50,000.

3. The ld.AO has erred in law as well as on the facts by recovering for a sum of Rs.65,26,729 towards a penalty u/s.270A of the IT Act whereas the hearing of said appeal with CIT(A) is in process. Your appellant prays to refund the said amount and recover only after appeal file in this context before CIT(A) would be finalised.”

3.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Government Organization. It filed return of income at Rs.23,14,67,690/-, which was, thereafter, selected for scrutiny assessment under section 143(3) of the Act. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee pleaded before the AO that it had filed return of income on the basis of estimated income as per the provisional accounts. However, the assessee being a Government organization, has to get its accounts audited from a Government auditor; that there was some delay on the part of the Government auditor to audit the accounts of the assessee concerned. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted after filing the return based on the estimated income, the accounts of the assessee have been audited, and as per the audited accounts, the income of the assessee for the year under consideration came to Rs.21,31,72,139/- instead of income of Rs.23,14,67,690/- as per the provisional accounts, which was the amount of income initially returned in the income tax return. The assessee, therefore, pleaded before the AO that the actual income of the assessee as per the audited accounts was Rs.21,31,72,139/- be assessed and not the income declared and reflected in the return of income filed.

The AO, however, did not agree with the aforesaid contentions raised by the assessee. He held that the assessee itself has declared income of Rs.23,14,67,690/- in the return of income, and no revised return was filed by the assessee. He therefore refused to go through

More judgments on Section 270A

All 4,156 judgments and leading authorities on Section 270A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →