Vijayalaxmi Vernekar vs. ITO, Ward 5(3)(4)

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Vijayalaxmi Vernekar, filed an appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2020-21. The assessee raised several grounds for appeal, primarily challenging computational errors in the assessment order. The assessee claimed that the Assessing Officer had made arithmetic errors in computing the total income and interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee submitted that the total income was incorrectly computed at Rs. 30,84,780 instead of Rs. 30,10,720, resulting in an excess tax demand of approximately Rs. 23,107. Additionally, the assessee argued that the interest under section 234B was wrongly computed by deducting Rs. 2,41,036 instead of the correct amount of Rs. 6,41,720, leading to an excess interest levy of Rs. 2,24,728.…

Legal Issues

• 1. The order of the learned Assessing Officer is contrary to law and facts of the case, and is therefore unsustainable.
• 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the assessment without appreciating that the Assessing Officer committed an arithmetic error in adopting a total income of Rs.30,84,780 in the computation sheet for the purpose of levy of tax, whereas the total income as determined in the assessment order itself is Rs.30,10,720, resulting in excess tax demand of approximately Rs. 23,107 on an inflated income of Rs. 74,060.
• 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in law in failing to adjudicate Ground No. 1 of the appeal filed before him, which challenged the computation of interest under section 234B amounting to Rs. 2,95,120. The order of the CIT(A) is entirely silent on this ground and contains no finding whatsoever, rendering the order defective and constituting a jurisdictional error.
• 4. The Assessing Officer erred in computing interest under section 234B by deducting only Rs. 2,41,036 (being the tax computed on income as per the return filed) from the assessed tax of Rs.7,67,451, instead of deducting the TDS of Rs.6,41,720 actually deducted and deposited by the employer with the Central Government, as mandated by Section 209(1)(d) of the Act read with Section 234B.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• MONIKA INDUSTRIES VS. ITO, WARD 56(3)

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2018-19Allowed

• Deloitte Employees Welfare Trust Vs. ITO, Ward-22(1)(6)

  SMC BENCH, MUMBAI benchAY 2022-23Allowed

• Shree Capital Services Ltd. Vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-5(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata ‘D’ Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2023-24Allowed

• EBZ SE vs. ADIT-CPC

  Mumbai bench

• Associated Global Finance Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2017-18Allowed

• M/s Excella Realtors Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward-1(3), TDS, Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2014-15Allowed