TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in enhancing the assessment and in determining the total income of the appellant society at ₹ 13,62,550/- as against the income determined by the Assessing Officer of ₹ 11,09,980/.-. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in holding that by recomputing the revised total income as per the report submitted by the Assessing Officer, the dispute rose on account of disallowance of ₹ 4,92,809/- is settled. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) ought to have seen that the Assessing Officer is not correct in disallowing a sum of ₹ 4,92,809/- as the proportionate expenditure in respect of the income from house property. 4. The le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 27,49,295/-. The Assessing officer, after discussion with the administrative officer and taking his consent proposed to disallow ₹ 4,92,809/- out of this expenditure claimed by the assessee. However, while computing the income, he made an error. Instead of adding a sum of ₹ 4,92,809/- which is towards disallowance of expenditure, the assessing officer made a deduction of this amount from the income and thus there was an error in the computation of income made by assessing officer. The Assessing Officer also assessed the interest on Fixed Deposits and rental income received on hoarding by the assessee as income from other sources , as against the claim of the assessee for assessing the same as business income . The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... = Rs.14,30,635 iii) Loss from business as returned (-) Rs.6,78,752/- Less: addition proposed in the Assessment order as agreed by the Assessee Rs.4,92,809/- (-)Rs.1,85,943/- Add: income from hoardings Rs.51,702/- (-) ₹ 2,37,645/- Gross Total income Rs.16,66,791/- Less: 80P deduction as allowed by assessing officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of income under head income from business to the gross total income. However, the assessing officer is added this amount ₹ 4,92,809/- to the Gross Total income. Thus, the loss claimed by the assessee at ₹ 6,78,752 /- should have been reduced by an amount of ₹ 4,92,809/-as agreed by the administrative officer of the assessee and the net resultant figure of business loss should be 1,85,943/- and this amount of ₹ 1,85,943/- being business loss should have been reduced from the Gross total income. Further, the income from hoarding was wrongly treated by the assessee as business income, the CIT(A) corrected this error and treated this income under head income from other sources which is resulted in increase of busi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n elaborate discussion and opportunity of hearing with the department. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, there is no error of law in the view taken by the CIT(A) that the disallowance was made by the assessing officer on the basis of consent given by the assessee voluntarily. The disallowance made by assessing officer which was accepted by the assessee and the same must be accepted by the assessee as an honest disclosure and such disallowance cannot be deleted as the assessee is bound by that disallowance and the assessee cannot have any grievance against the assessee s own admission at this point of time. The case law relied by the learned departmental representative in the case of Ramesh Chandra Company Vs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om house property as the assessee itself has disclosed the rental income under the head income from house property . Once the assessee voluntarily filed the return of income, and not filed any revised return, by changing the head of income declared by it on earlier occasion, then it is not possible to the assessee to contend that any such disclosure or admission was made on account of mistaken belief. Considering the totality and circumstances of the case, the assessee cannot claim the change in head of income without any valid revised return of income. 8. The last contention of the assessee is with regard to treating the income from display of hoarding and interest on deposits with the cooperative societies as income from other source ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
