COSMO FILMS LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 6(2), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5606/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 August 2023AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the lower authorities erred in denying the correction of an apparent error in the Sales Tax Subsidy amount. The issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Cosmo Films Ltd., appealed against an order upholding assessed income. The main dispute concerned the correct amount of Sales Tax Subsidy, where a significant correction was sought after the assessment order.

What were the issues?

Whether a correction of an apparent error in the computation of income, specifically regarding Sales Tax Subsidy, can be made under Section 154 after assessment. The issue also involves whether a reversal of sales tax liability from earlier years, already disallowed under Section 43B, leads to double taxation when included in the current year's subsidy.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 143(3),Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. YOGESH KUMAR US

Hearing: 07/08/2023Pronounced: 07/08/2023

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-31, New Delhi dated 26.04.2019 pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14.

2. The grievance of the assessee read as under :- 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the assessed income of the Appellant at Rs.19,20,40,130/- under section 154 / 143 (3) of the Act instead of Rs.9,94,15,630/-.

2.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case and I law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the audition made by Ld. Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred as ‘Ld. AO) on account of ‘Sales Tax Subsidy’ at Rs.9,48,35,932/- instead as of Rs.22,11,432/-.

3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the amount of Rs.9,48,35,932 includes ‘Reversal of sales tax liability’ of earlier years of Rs.9,26,24,500 which have already been disallowed in terms of Section 43B of the Act in the respective years viz. AY 2004-05 & 2005-06 and as such would lead to the said amount being taxed twice.

4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not taking cognizance of the financial statements for AY 2013-14 viz-a-viz Tax Audit Report for AY 2004-05 & 2005-06 duly placed on record.

3.

Representatives of both the sides were heard at length. Case records carefully perused.

4.

The bone of contention is the Sale Tax Subsidy which was in advertently mentioned in the computation as Rs.94835932/- and later on corrected at Rs.2211432/- . This correction was done by way of an application filed u/s.154 of the Act after the completion of the assessment vide order dated 27.10.2017 framed u/s. 143(3) of the Act r.w.s. 144C of the Act.

5.

Both the lower authorities denied the correction of the figure in sale tax subsidy stating that the same should have been revised by way of revised return of income.

6.

In our considered opinion both the lower authorities erred in taking this view in as much as any error which is apparent from record has to be rectified.

7.

In the interest of justice and fair play we restore this issue to the files of the AO. The assessee is directed to furnish revised computation of income and the AO is directed to examine/ verify the same and decide the issue afresh after affording a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

9.

Decision announced in the open court 07.08.2023.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →