Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.25 seconds)

Pramod Kumar Tiwari, Raipur vs Dcit, (Cpc), Bengaluru on 7 September, 2022

5. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the decision of the Bangalore Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Arthur Bernad Sebastine Pais vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore (supra) is not applicable. In the said case before the Bangalore Benches of the Tribunal, the controversy was only regarding applicability of section 44AD or section 44ADA. Whereas in the case in 4 ITA No.12/Alld/ 2022 Pramod Kumar Tiwari hand, the assessee has admittedly filed the return under wrong provisions of presumptive tax under section 44ADA whereas the commission income as reflected in Form 26AS is subjected to TDS under section 194H and is required to be declared in Form ITR 3 as per the normal computation of income and not under presumptive income under the provisions of section 44ADA of the Act. The assessee has filed the profit and loss account showing the income declared and the return of income as the net profit after deduction of expenditure from the gross commission income. The CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by citing the reason that the mistake in filing ITR 4 could have been rectified by the assessee by filing the revised return. The CIT(A) was of the view that the assessee has not availed the option available under the Income Tax Act. It is pertinent to note that when the assessee is having no other business activity then the commission income then the adjustment made by the CPC has resulted a double addition to the extent of Rs. 12,64,692/- already declared by the assessee in the return of income as the CPC has made the adjustment of gross amount of commission and not net income or profit out of the gross commission receipts. Accordingly, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the AO for deciding the same afresh after considering all the relevant facts and record to be produced by the assessee. Needless to say the assessee be given an appropriate opportunity of hearing before passing the fresh order.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1