MEENAKSHI MERCANTILES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 11(1), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that there was a clear calculation mistake in the exempt income as reflected in the Section 143(1) intimation. It held that this mistake needed to be corrected, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed its return of income, which was processed under Section 143(1). A mistake in calculating the exempt income led to an addition. The assessee's subsequent rectification applications and appeal to the CIT(A) were dismissed on technical grounds.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on technical grounds when there was a clear calculation error in the exempt income, and whether the mistake in the Section 143(1) intimation should be rectified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “ C” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]
Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 22.01.2025 की यिथर्थ Date of Pronouncement/ 31.01.2025 आदेश उद्घोषणा की यिथर्थ For the assessee / Shri S. K. Tulsiyan, AR यनर्ााररिी की ओर से For the revenue / राजस्व Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT की ओर से ORDER / आदेश Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-Addl. / JCIT(A)- 25, Mysore (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT(A)] dated 08.10.2024 for AY 2020-21.
The only issue raised by the assessee in this appeal is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal on improper consolidation of the grounds of appeal relating to two different orders i.e. 143(1) and 154 of the Act thereby upholding the 2 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Meenakshi Mercantiles Ltd. order passed by the CPC dated 30.11.2021 wherein there was a total mistake in the total exempt income which was taken at Rs. 5,57,95,702/- instead of Rs. 5,95,66,940/- thereby resulting into sustaining of addition of Rs. 37,71,038/-.
Facts in brief are that the assessee filed a return of income on 25.03.2021 declaring total income of Rs. 8,65,06,120/- which was processed u/s 143(1) vide order dated 30.11.2021. In the said intimation, order passed u/s 143(1) there was a mistake apparent from the record for which the assessee moved a rectification order u/s 154 of the Act dated 14.12.2021. However, the same was not rectified. Again the assessee filed rectification application before CPC on 16.02.2022 but again mistake was not rectified. Then the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. JCIT(A) against the order u/s 143(1) with a delay of 90 days. However, the appeal was dismissed by the JCIT by holding that the assessee had filed an appeal against 143(1) dated 30.11.2021 but relating to adjustments made in order u/s 154 dated 16.02.2022.
Now the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal challenging the appellate order u/s 250 of the Act.
After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that in the intimation passed by Ld. CPC u/s 143(1) dated 30.11.2021 the assessee declared total exempt income of Rs. 5,95,66,740/- which comprised of following: i) share of income from firms Rs. 16,45,319/- ii) Other exempt income dividend Rs. 4,77,17,980/- iii)Interest Rs. 1,00,05,713/- iv) Agricultural income Rs. 1,97,728/- Total exempt income Rs. 5,95,66,740/- However, in the intimation u/s 143(1), the said income was wrongly taken as Rs. 5,57,95,702/-. The same appears to be calculation mistake on the part of the CPC and needs to be rectified. The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on technical issue that the assessee has raised ground both against orders u/s 143(1) order as well as u/s 154 of 3 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Meenakshi Mercantiles Ltd. the Act passed by the CPC, Bengaluru. However, the fact remains that wrong income cannot be assessed by the CPC when all the facts and figures were available at first hand in the return of income. In our opinion, the said intimation is required to be corrected. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO correct the figure of exempt income as 5,95,66,740/- as against Rs. 5,57,95,702/- as taken in the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 31st January, 2025
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026