ILLABEN JAYANTKUMAR DOSHI,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , RAJKOT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 168/RJT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 August 2025AY 2013-145 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 object of assessment proceedings under section 143(3) is to determine the correct income and taxes. It found no bar to a taxpayer making a claim by letter without filing a revised return in a section 143(3) assessment. While the Assessing Officer may not be entitled to grant a deduction based solely on a letter requesting an amendment, appellate authorities are entitled to consider such claims. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to correct the erroneous double addition of Rs. 13,32,054/- to the computation of income, as it led to an incorrect determination of taxable income, and to determine the taxable income afresh in accordance with law. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal based on the ruling in Goetze India Ltd., distinguishing it as applicable to fresh claims in assessment proceedings, not appellate proceedings. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Illaben Jayantkumar Doshi, filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) dated 19.02.2025, which upheld an order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on 08.03.2016. The assessment year in question is 2013-14. The assessee's return declared a total income of Rs. 26,793/-. During assessment, the Assessing Officer disallowed proportionate interest income of Rs. 2852/- under section 14A. The assessee's primary grievance is that an amount of Rs. 13,32,054/- was added twice to the computation of income, leading to an incorrect determination of taxable income. The assessee also sought to raise an additional claim before the appellate authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the Assessing Officer's determination of income at Rs. 29,650/-, when an amount of Rs. 13,32,054/- was erroneously added twice in the computation of income? (Question of fact and law, concerning correct computation of income). 2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not using his powers to admit an additional claim, which the assessee contended was allowable based on various judicial decisions? (Question of law and fact, concerning the powers of appellate authorities to admit fresh claims). Assessee's Contentions: - An amount of Rs. 13,32,054/- was erroneously added twice to the computation of income, and an instruction should be given to the Assessing Officer to correct this error. - The taxpayer is entitled to claim deductions before appellate authorities even if not claimed in the original or revised return, citing decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, including Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd., Jute Corporation of India, and Goetze (India) Ltd. The omission was inadvertent. Revenue's Contentions: - The Revenue primarily reiterated the stand taken by the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 139

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI

For Respondent: Shri R.D. Lalchandani, AR, Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Sr-DR
Pronounced: 04/08/2025

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :  अपीलाथ�/ The Assessee  ��यथ�/ The Respondent  आयकर आयु�त/ CIT आयकर आयु�त(अपील)/ The CIT(A)   �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, राजकोट/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

// True Copy // By order/आदेश से,

सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, राजकोट

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →