Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

M/s Pinstorm Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

7. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee further submits that the claim of expenses in the Return of income was a mistake while uploading the return of Income Electronically. There is a human error in filling electronic form, the same was remained unnoticed while filing the return. The Ld. Counsel submits that during the assessment the error was noticed, and revised computation was furnished explaining the variation and clearly mentioning the addition of Rs. 131,145,849/- on account of Advance & Deposits written off, Provision for doubtful debts & advances, capital expenditure written off etc. The Ld. Counsel submits that there is lack of intention on the part of Assessee to conceal the particulars of income. The return of loss is not useful to the Assessee since the loss cannot be carried forward and was not set off due to delay in filing the return. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the Assessee has taken the professional help and relied on their work. The tax consultant made human error in filling electronic return for uploading Income Tax related particulars. The Ld. Counsel submits that the disallowance of expenses were reported in the Tax Audit report, which is the complete disclosure of the issues covered. The Ld. Counsel submits that in view of the following decisions no penalty is attracted in its case.

8. The Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.

9. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the case laws relied on. The Assessee filed return of income electronically on 14.02.2012 declaring loss of Rs.16,10,43,542/-. Admittedly this return was filed belatedly and beyond due date for filing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act and in which case the business loss reported in the return is not eligible for carry forward and set off against income in subsequent assessment years. The Assessee submits that the return and computation was prepared by the then CFO and he did not properly upload the return by showing the expenses disallowable as reported in the tax audit report. The Assessee contended that in the tax audit report the auditors have mentioned that these expenses were not allowable, however, while uploading the return, the employee had made a mistake in not disallowing these expenses. The Assessee further contended that in any case return was filed belatedly in which event the loss reported by the Assessee is not eligible for carry forward and there is no occasion for claiming such loss in the future years, therefore, there is no loss to the revenue. The Assessee contended that it is a mistake committed by the employee of the company and therefore it was submitted that there is no deliberate concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars by the Assessee. It was contended that it is a human error in filing electronic form of return and it was remained unnoticed while filing the return. The error came to be noticed only in the course of assessment proceedings and it was explained that the Assessee has not claimed any expenditure.

19. The contents of the Tax Audit Report suggest that there is no question of the assessee concealing its income. There is also no question of the assessee furnishing any inaccurate particulars. It appears to us that all that has happened in the present case is that through a bona fide and inadvertent error, the assessee while submitting its return, failed to add the provision for gratuity to its total income. This can only be described as a human error which we are all prone to make. The calibre and expertise of the assessee has little or nothing to do with the inadvertent error. That the assessee should have been careful cannot be doubted, but the absence of due care, in a case such as the present, does not mean that the assessee is guilty of either furnishing inaccurate particulars or attempting to conceal its income.