Return of Income Can Claim Made by Assessee in the Revised Return Filed After Due Time Under Section 139(5) is Entertainable?

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers Income Tax--Return of Income Can Claim Made by Assessee in the Revised Return Filed After Due Time Under Section 139(5) is Entertainable? Akhilesh Kumar Sah The Supreme Court has well resolved the controversy regarding claims made in the revised return filed after due time under section 139(5) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') by limiting the powers of AO in this respect. 1. Introduction At present, section 139 (5) of the Act provides that if any person, having furnished a return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (4), discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before [the words 'the expiry of one year from' have been omitted by Finance Act, 2017 (w.e.f. 1-4-2018)] the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier. Shriram Investments v. CIT (CA No 6274 of 2013) decided by the Supreme Court of India on 4-10-2024 2024 TaxPub(DT).... is a recent case on the issue. 2. Facts Assessee filed a return of income on 19-11-1989 under the Act for the assessment year 1989-90. On 31-10-1990, the appellant filed a revised return. As per intimation issued under section 143(1)(a) of the Act on 27-8-1991, the appellant paid the necessary tax amount. On 29-10-1991, the appellant filed another revised return. AO had not taken cognizance of the said revised return. Assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal on the ground that in view of section 139(5) of the Act, the revised return filed on 29-10-1991 was barred by limitation. Assessee filed appeal before ITAT, where the appeal was partly allowed by remanding the case back to the file of AO and was directed to consider the assessee's claim regarding the deduction of deferred revenue expenditure. The respondent Department filed an appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The High Court proceeded to set aside the order of ITAT on the ground that after the revised return was barred by time, there was no provision to consider the claim made by the appellant. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers

Income Tax--Return of Income

Can Claim Made by Assessee in the Revised Return Filed After Due Time Under Section 139(5) is Entertainable?

Akhilesh Kumar Sah

The Supreme Court has well resolved the controversy regarding claims made in the revised return filed after due time under section 139(5) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') by limiting the powers of AO in this respect.

1. Introduction

At present, section 139 (5) of the Act provides that if any person, having furnished a return under sub-section (1) or sub-section (4), discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before [the words 'the expiry of one year from' have been omitted by Finance Act, 2017 (w.e.f. 1-4-2018)] the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier.

Shriram Investments v. CIT (CA No 6274 of 2013) decided by the Supreme Court of India on 4-10-2024 2024 TaxPub(DT).... is a recent case on the issue.

2. Facts

Assessee filed a return of income on 19-11-1989 under the Act for the assessment year 1989-90. On 31-10-1990, the appellant filed a revised return. As per intimation issued under section 143(1)(a) of the Act on 27-8-1991, the appellant paid the necessary tax amount. On 29-10-1991, the appellant filed another revised return. AO had not taken cognizance of the said revised return. Assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal on the ground that in view of section 139(5) of the Act, the revised return filed on 29-10-1991 was barred by limitation. Assessee filed appeal before ITAT, where the appeal was partly allowed by remanding the case back to the file of AO and was directed to consider the assessee's claim regarding the deduction of deferred revenue expenditure. The respondent Department filed an appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. The High Court proceeded to set aside the order of ITAT on the ground that after the revised return was barred by time, there was no provision to consider the claim made by the appellant.