HARERAM KOLEY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-24(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The assessee in the present case is an individual, who filed his return of income for the year under consideration showing his residential status as “resident” and offering to tax his entire global income therein. The said return was processed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1) and the income as returned by the assessee was accepted by the Assessing Officer vide his intimation dated 26.12.2012 issued under ./2016 Assessment year: 2011-2012 Page 2 of 3 section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter the assessee realized the mistake committed by him in showing his status as “resident” in the return of income instead of “non-resident”. He also realized that the entire global income was wrongly offered to tax by him in the said return instead of only the income earned in India. He, therefore, filed an appeal against the intimation issued by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1) before the ld. CIT(Appeals) seeking a direction from the ld. CIT(Appeals) to the Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 147 and to determine his correct income liable to tax in India. The ld. CIT(Appeals) did not find merit in the appeal of the assessee and dismissed the same for the following reasons given in his impugned order:- “I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the appellant. Assessee made so many mistakes while filing the return of income. First, he filled up the income tax return in a wrong ITR Form. Secondly, residential status was not correctly mentioned. Thirdly, income earned outside India was included in the return of income. AO has only processed the return and accepted assessee's returned income. Hence there is no cause of grievance to the assessee on account of any action of the A.O. Under the circumstances there is no reason for filing appeal. Assessee's request for directing the AO to issue notice u/s 147 is not acceptable because mandate of Section 147 is not for making correction in assessee's returns on his request. Besides, AO has not done nothing which he was not supposed to do while processing the return u/s 143(1). No relief can be provided to the assessee u/s 143(1), even if I give any directions to the AO. Under the circumstances this appeal is not maintainable and hence dismissed”.

Although the ld. Authorized Representative of the assessee at the time of hearing before me has moved an application seeking adjournment, it is observed that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the assessee before the ITAT. As rightly submitted by the ld. D.R. in this regard, when the income declared by the assessee in his return of income was accepted by the Assessing Officer vide an intimation issued under section 143(3), ./2016 Assessment year: 2011-2012 Page 3 of 3 he could not be said to be aggrieved by the said appeal so as to give him a right to file an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Moreover, the prayer made by the assessee in the said appeal to the ld. CIT(Appeals) for directing the Assessing Officer to issue notice under section 147/148 in order to enable the assessee to declare the correct income, was also not tenable as the ld. CIT(Appeals) was not empowered to do so and the provisions of section 147/148 even otherwise are for the benefit of the Revenue and not for the benefit of the assessee. If there was any mistake on the part of the assessee in filing his return of income, which was duly accepted by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1), the filing of appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals) was not the proper remedy to correct the same. I, therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee before him and upholding the same, I dismiss this appeal filed by the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on February 03, 2017.