SH. SANJAY KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6745/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 July 2016AY 2004-054 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee accepted the salary income as the total income and did not press the issue of reassessment. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee declared a total income after deducting a business loss. The AO reopened the assessment and disallowed the business loss, computing income based on salary and a small business income. The CIT(A) deleted the business income addition but upheld the reassessment notice.

What were the issues?

The validity of the reassessment notice and the allowability of the claimed business loss.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : SMC-I: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Sanat Kapoor, Advocate
Hearing: 07.06.2016Pronounced: 07.06.2016

ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 5.1.2012 in relation to the assessment year 2004-05.

2.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee furnished his return declaring total income of Rs.2,89,450/-. This amount of total income was derived by reducing `Business loss’ amounting to Rs.1,41,450/- from the income under the head ‘Salaries’ at Rs.4,30,899/.

The AO noticed in completing the assessment u/s 147 that the assessee was an employee of Maruti Udyog Limited who accepted voluntary retirement under the V.R. Scheme on total salary of Rs.10,27,989/-.

Form No.16A disclosed taxable salary of Rs.4,45,899/-, on which tax was deducted at source amounting to Rs.97,270/-. The AO observed that the assessee declared business loss of Rs.1,41,450/- out of non- existent business styled as Universal Computer Centre simple with a view to reduce its total income under the head ‘Salaries.’ Such loss was rejected and business income was computed @5% on gross receipts from this business shown at Rs.62,500/-. That is how, the AO computed total income at Rs.4,49,024/- comprising of salary as per Form No.16A amounting to Rs.4,45,899/- and `Business income’ of Rs.3,125/-. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of Rs.3,125/-, but, upheld the validity of notice issued u/s 148 for re-assessment. The assessee is in appeal before me.

3.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. The ld. AR was fair in his approach in accepting that income under the head ‘Salaries’ as per Form No.16A be considered as total income amounting to Rs.4,45,899/- and the loss computed by the AO at Rs.3,125/- should be ignored. Since the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs.3,125/- and the Revenue is not in appeal, there remains no question of agitating this addition of Rs.3,125/- as deleted in the first appeal. The issue of re-assessment was not pressed by the ld. AR, when he candidly admitted that the total income be assessed at Rs.4,45,899/-. I, therefore, uphold the impugned order.

4.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

The order pronounced in the open court on 07.06.2016.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →