TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 603X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inadvertently adopted Business income of ₹ 1.46 Crores as Total income, which had the effect of excluding Income from other sources at ₹ 22.54 lakhs, which was independently offered by the assessee in its return of income and was not a subject matter of any dispute. It is this mistake which the AO rectified in the current proceedings u/s.154 of the Act by also including Income from other sources amounting to ₹ 22.54 lakhs in the total income, which was earlier omitted to be included in the original assessment order. In our considered opinion, it is a clear-cut case of the AO carrying out rectification of a glaring and patent mistake committed in the original assessment order. By no standard, it can be construed as a debat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee is with regard to the addition made through order of rectification u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act‟) by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(Appeal). 3. The facts on this issue are well enumerated at Para 6 of the order of Ld. CIT(Appeal) which is extracted herein below: 6. From the assessment order u/s. 143(3) dated.22/08/2012, the A.O. had noticed that the appellant had filed submission dated 12/07/2012. Wherein, it had worked out the agreed addition as under: Particulars Amount (Rs.) Total Contract receipts 15,07,89,759/- Less. Contracts and sub contract ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment order u/s.143(3) dated 22.08.2012. The AO has accordingly made addition of ₹ 22,54,821/- in the order passed u/s.154 of the Act. 4. That during the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee contended that the specific amount of ₹ 48,40,200/- was offered to tax as agreed addition to buy peace of mind and to co operate with the Department. The assessee further claimed that while agreeing for the assessed income at ₹ 1,46,15,111/-, the amount of ₹ 22,54,821/- was considered in the said amount. Therefore, the impugned amount could not be separately added u/s.154 of the Act. The CIT(Appeal) on this issue has observed as follows: 8. I have carefully considered the facts of the case and rival conten ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the above computation the profit from contract business was offered to tax at ₹ 1,46,15,111/- which does not include income from other sources ₹ 22,54,821/-. Therefore, the contention of the appellant is rejected. 9. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 5. We have perused the relevant documents on records specifically assessment order, rectification order u/s.154 of the Act and the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeal) confirming the said rectification order wherein the addition of ₹ 22,54,821/- was confirmed. It is noticed that the assessee filed return declaring total income of ₹ 98,00,250/-. A copy of Computation of income is available at Page 1 of the paper book, which depicts Income from business at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss income of ₹ 1.46 Crores as Total income, which had the effect of excluding Income from other sources at ₹ 22.54 lakhs, which was independently offered by the assessee in its return of income and was not a subject matter of any dispute. It is this mistake which the Assessing Officer rectified in the current proceedings u/s.154 of the Act by also including Income from other sources amounting to ₹ 22.54 lakhs in the total income, which was earlier omitted to be included in the original assessment order. In our considered opinion, it is a clear-cut case of the AO carrying out rectification of a glaring and patent mistake committed in the original assessment order. By no standard, it can be construed as a debatable point ame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
