Mistake Occurred Due to Typographical Error, ITAT Kolkata Rejects Revision Order

The revision order has been set aside by the Kolkata Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) as an accidental mistake because of the typographical error in computing the total income.

PCIT asked for the issue in the revisionary proceedings related to the understatement of the short-term capital gain (STCG). For the taxpayer concern, Bijni Dooars Tea Company Ltd has furnished to the PCIT that it has incorrectly adjusted the Long-Term Capital Loss made at the time of the year twice, once with Long Term Capital Gain and again with Short Term Capital Gain out of an accidental blunder in its income calculation under the normal provisions of the Act.

The total gain amount on the sale of the investments was wrongly shown in the audited balance sheet. Hence no mala fide intention of the taxpayer was there and the same was the matter of the accidental mistake.

There shall be no more tax obligation because of the mentioned error as stated above as the taxpayer was obligated to file the tax under section 115JB of the Income Tax Act and the taxpayer secured the surplus tax credit under Section 115JAA of the Income Tax Act For tax paid in before years.

The original along with the amended/correct calculation of the income and the tax computation thereon were directed and placed on record from where the same was pointed out that the total tax subjected to get filed for the AY 2018-19 remained identical.

It was emphasized that as it has filed the requisite tax on the total income and there comes no other tax obligation because of the stated clerical mistake, so far the prejudicial to the interest of the revenue the assessment order was not wrong.

As per the taxpayer the mere amount carried forward credit under Section 115JAA of the Income Tax Act needed to be lowered will be funcitoned in its income tax return for AY 2023-24.

On behalf of the taxpayer, S.K. Tulsiyan has appeared, and on behalf of the revenue S. Datta appeared. The two-member Bench of Rajpal Yadav, (Vice President) and Girish Agrawal, (Accountant Member) set aside the revision order following that, We discover that on the same problem, the current case is on attributes which are checkable from the records of the taxpayers, examination and verification of the original calculation of income and tax vis-à-vis the amended calculation of income and tax placed on record.

We discover that it is a case of a bonafide mistake that the taxpayer committed, which effectively does not result in prejudice caused to the revenue in the year under respect. Tax obligation for the year under consideration is duly released via the taxpayer which has been demonstrated from the two computations placed on record.

Also, the bench ruled that every loss of revenue as a result of the order of the Assessing Officer (AO) can not be deemed as prejudicial to the revenue interest. When one of the courses allowed in the law is been opted by the assessing officer and then it renders with the revenue loss or where the two views are likely and the assessing officer had opted for one view through which the CIT does not agree, the same cannot be deemed as an inadvertent order prejudicial to the interest of the revenue until the view carried via the Assessing Officer was unsustainable in law.