Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “F” : DELHI
Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI O.P. KANT
ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.
This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Learned CIT(A), Hisar, dated 30th November 2015, for the assessment year 2009-2010, challenging the order of Learned CIT(A), in confirming the order of assessing officer of rejecting the application under section 154 of the Income Tax Act 1961.
2 ITA.No.709/Del./2016 M/s. Hisar Foils Pvt. Ltd., Hisar. Haryana.
Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee company e-filed the FBT return along with income tax return on 18th September 2009 declaring fringe benefits of Rs.2,19,470/-. The assessment was completed under section 115WE(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide order dated 12th December 2011. The assessing officer made additions of Rs.782/- and Rs 184/-,and computed the total fringe benefit at Rs.2,20,440/-. The assessee, thereafter, filed the rectification application under section 154 of Income Tax Act, requesting the assessing officer to take the figure of FBT as per profit and loss account of the assessee. The assessing officer rejected the application under section 154 on the plea that miscalculation or system error has been committed by the assessee, in which, the department has no role. The assessee did not file any revised return of income. Therefore, application under section 154 was rejected. The assessee challenged the order of the assessing officer under section 154 before Learned CIT(A) and made the following submissions :
3 ITA.No.709/Del./2016 M/s. Hisar Foils Pvt. Ltd., Hisar. Haryana. “While importing the FBT data some system error occurred and the computer software imported the FBT data of some other client i.e. Indo-Furnace Pvt Ltd. which code might have been open on some other system as all the computers were on LAN in the CA office. Otherwise in the return all the figures are of our company which were fed by us as per audited accounts.
The Mistake remained unnoticed at the time of filing of return & also at the time of assessment. While making the assessment a disallowance of Rs.75000/- made out of different expenses. The figures of Travelling & Conveyance & Telephone expenses are same as per profit & loss A/C, which is clear from the assessment order itself.
The mistake in figures were noticed only when the appellant received the challan/demand noticed in Dec, 2011 for Rs.36,430/- for a merger addition of Rs. 966/- and then everything was looked into details and cross verified.
4 ITA.No.709/Del./2016 M/s. Hisar Foils Pvt. Ltd., Hisar. Haryana. By that time the period available us 139(5) for filling revised return was lapsed. Hence the appellant could not revise its return and filed an application u/s 154 before the A.O. which he rejected without understating the basic point that the Appellant Company was being asked to pay fringe benefit tax on the expenses/figures of some other Assessee.”
The Learned CIT(A) considering explanation of assessee, dismissed the appeal of assessee. His findings in Paras 5 and 6 of the Order are reproduced as under :
5. I have gone through the facts of the case and submissions made by the appellant. It is noted that there is a provision u/s 139(5) of Income Tax Act of the 1961 whereby the assessee can revise return at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant Assessment Year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier. In this case, the assessee has not availed this opportunity and failed to revise the 5 ITA.No.709/Del./2016 M/s. Hisar Foils Pvt. Ltd., Hisar. Haryana. details in its return of income. In the appellate proceedings, he cannot revise the details submitted in its return of income. Therefore, there is no case for him to rectifying the miscalculation or errors committed on its part, after the lapse of time. Assessee has enough opportunities to rectify the error and revise the return within the prescribed time limit. He has not offered any explanation for not rectifying the error within the time limit. Assessing officer has rightly rejected his application u/s 154 as details submitted by him cannot be rectified which will be revision of the particulars submitted by the assessee.
In result, the appeal is dismissed.”
After considering the rival submissions, we do not find any merit in the appeal of the assessee. According to Learned Counsel for the Assessee some error was committed by the assessee while filing the return for FBT. The assessee declared fringe benefit of Rs.2,19,470/-. Whatever figure was given by the assessee has been accepted by the 6 ITA.No.709/Del./2016 M/s. Hisar Foils Pvt. Ltd., Hisar. Haryana. department. Therefore. there is no mistake apparent on record from the side of the Revenue Department because whatever figure was declared by the assessee has been accepted by the department. If there was any mistake in the return of income containing miscalculation of FBT, proper course is allowed under the Income Tax Act to file a revised return of income. However, the assessee did not take any steps in this regard. Therefore, no mistake is attributable to the assessing officer which should be rectified under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee is responsible for his own acts and as such, Learned CIT(A) correctly dismissed the appeal of assessee. The appeal of assessee is dismissed.
In the result appeal of assessee dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court.