The assessee filed the return showing the derivative loss as speculation loss and has not setoff against other income. On realizing the mistake the assessee filed revision petition stating that due to mistake he has shown derivative loss as speculative loss instead of business loss.  The revision petition was dismissed on account of delay. High Court set aside the order for denovo consideration. The Commissioner dismissed the petition on the ground that  additions which are voluntarily agreed cannot be the subject matter of revision. On writ allowing the petition the Court held that  even if, return as submitted by the assessee is accepted by the Assessing Officer, and if thereafter, the assessee comes to know about the mistakes committed, that he was not liable for more taxation or had paid more tax, he can definitely approach revenue authority and in such event, it is open to the revisional authority to exercise its jurisdiction u/s 264 of the Act. Once assessee is able to satisfy about mistake due to which there was over assessment, the Commissioner had power to correct the same u/s 264(1) of the Act. In such situation, we would expect the Commissioner to apply his mind to the question and decide the matter. Simply saying, additions which are voluntarily agreed, cannot be the subject matter of revision, would be little harsh on assessee. Therefore, we hereby set aside order dated 29.09.2014 impugned in this petition and remand the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax for denovo consideration of petitioner’s application u/s 264 of the Act. (WP No. 1777 of 2015, Dt. 29-4-22) (AY. 2008-2009)

Anup Lakhmichand Anand  v. CIT (Bom.)(HC) (UR)