The Calcutta High Court (HC) allowed the revision application under section 264 of the Income Tax Act,1961 to rectify the mistake of offering exempted income to tax by an old lady.
Ena Chaudhuri, the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders dated 24th March 2014 in respect of Assessment Years 2007-008 and 2008-09 respectively, passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, under Section 264 of The Income Tax Act, 1961, rejecting the petitioner’s application.
The petitioner is an old lady of advancing age and being unaware of the technicalities of the income tax law, committed a mistake in her return by including the exempted income in question relating to dividend and long-term capital gain as income payable to tax and such mistake was realised by her only upon receipt of the orders passed under Section 143 (1) of The Income Tax Act, 1961.
The CIT dismissed the revision applications of the petitioner by holding that since the orders passed under Section 143 (1) of the Act relating to relevant assessment years could not be called erroneous and that the petitioner did not file the revised return under Section 139 (5) of the Act for the claim in question he could not allow such claim in the revision application under section 264 of the Income Tax Act.
A single-member bench consisting of Justice Md. Nizamuddinheld that “a mere typographical error committed by the assessee cannot cost them payment of excess tax as collected by the Revenue. Certainly, the denial for repayment of such excess collection would amount to great injustice to the Assessee.“
Further viewed that the impugned order cannot be sustained and was set aside. Further, the matter was remitted back to the respondent for considering the claim of the petitioner and passing appropriate orders.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
