What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the AO. The AO was directed to verify the assessee's claim that the amount was taxed in the previous year.

The Assessing Officer (AO) added Rs. 3,71,612/- to the assessee's income as it was not reflected in the income-tax return but appeared in Form 26AS. The assessee contended that this amount was received in the preceding year and offered for taxation then.

What were the issues?

Whether an amount appearing in Form 26AS but not offered for taxation in the current year should be added to the income, especially when the assessee claims it was taxed in a prior year.

Kerman Pervez Wadia vs ITO | ITAT Pune 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri R.P. Pratinidhi

For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S.SYAL, VP :

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-5, Pune on 20-11-2017 in relation to the assessment year 2014-15.

The only issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition of Rs.3,71,612/-

Succinctly, the facts of the case, are that the AO, on verification of TDS details in Form no. 26AS statement,

2 ITA No.491/PUN/2018 Kerman Pervez Wadia

observed that the assessee had not shown receipt of

Rs.3,71,612/- from M/s M.I. Overseas Limited. He, therefore,

made an addition for the said sum, which came to be affirmed

in the first appeal. The assessee is aggrieved by the addition.

Having heard both the sides and perused the relevant

material on record, it is seen that the assessee furnished a

revised Form 26AS and a letter from M/s M.I. Overseas

Limited dated 14-03-2008 indicating that entry of

Rs.3,71,612/- was wrongly punched into the account of the

assessee for the year. The ld. AR submitted that the sum of

Rs.3,71,612/- was actually received in the preceding year and

duly offered for taxation in the return of income filed for the

A.Y. 2013-14. Under these circumstances, I am of the

considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet

adequately if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is

restored to the file of AO. I order accordingly and direct him

to verify the assessee’s contention about the inclusion of

Rs.3,71,612/- in his income for the preceding year. If such a

contention is found to be correct, then the amount should not

be added to the income of the instant year.

3 ITA No.491/PUN/2018 Kerman Pervez Wadia

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04th December, 2018.

Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा�य� उपा�य�/ VICE PRESIDENT उपा�य� उपा�य�

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 04th December, 2018 सतीश आदेश क� क� क� �ितिलिप क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अ�ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent; आयकर आयु�(अपील) / 3. The CIT (Appeals)-5, Pune आयकर आयु� / The Pr. CIT-4, Pune 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6.

// True copy // आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार

// True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

ITA No.491/PUN/2018 Kerman Pervez Wadia

Date 1. Draft dictated on 04-12-18 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 04-12-18 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the JM second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second JM Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *

KERMAN PERVEZ WADIA,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 7(3), PUNE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments