13. ITO vs. Dilip Kumar Shaw (Kolkata)(SMC) Member : P. M. Jagtap (AM) ITA No.: 1517/Kol/2016 A.Y.: 2006-07. Dated: 4th June, 2018. Counsel for revenue / assessee: Nicholas Murmu/ Tapas Mondal Section 154 – The difference between contract receipts as stated in Form 16A and as assessed while assessing total income u/s. 143(3) of the Act, cannot be brought to tax by passing an order u/s. 154 of the Act.

FACTS

For assessment year 2006-07, the
assessee, an individual, filed his return of income declaring therein a total income
of Rs. 8,85,386.  The Assessing Officer
(AO) vide order dated 18.7.2008 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, assessed the
total income to be Rs. 9,25,390. 
Thereafter, it was noticed by the AO that the contractual receipts
credited in the Profit & Loss Account of the assessee were to the tune of
Rs.2,91,42,128/- whereas the contract receipts of the assessee as per TDS Form
16A were Rs.2,99,89,617/-. He, therefore, held that there was a mistake in the
assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) in taking the contract receipts short by
Rs.8,47,489/- and the same was rectified by him vide an order dated 08.12.2012
passed u/s. 154, wherein an addition of Rs.8,47,489/- was made by him to the
total income of the assessee.

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred
an appeal to the CIT(A) who after considering the submission made by the
assessee as well as the material available on record set aside the order passed
by the Assessing Officer u/s. 154 by holding the same as not maintainable.

Aggrieved, the revenue preferred an
appeal to the Tribunal where on behalf of the assessee it was stated that the
said difference was due to the mistake committed by the concerned party in
deducting tax at source from the contract receipts of the earlier years, which
was corrected by them by deducting more tax from the contract receipts of the
year under consideration.

HELD 

The Tribunal agreed with the
observations of the CIT(A) that there could be many reasons for the difference
noted by the AO in the contract receipts credited in the Profit & Loss
Account of the assessee and the contract receipts as shown in the relevant TDS
certificates. It observed that the difference in the contract receipts as
noticed by the AO, thus, required more investigation and enquiry to find out as
to whether there was any escapement of income of the assessee and as rightly
held by the CIT(A) it was not a case of obvious and patent mistake, which could
be rectified u/s. 154. This issue involved a debatable point which required
further enquiry and investigation and the same, therefore, was beyond the scope
of rectification permissible u/s. 154 as rightly held by the ld. CIT(A). The
Tribunal set aside the order passed by the AO u/s. 154 by treating the same as
not maintainable.

The appeal filed by the revenue was
dismissed.