JAGDISH VIDYALANKAR,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3)(1), HARIDWAR
Facts
The assessee claimed carry forward of loss of Rs. 17,48,562/-. The lower authorities rejected this claim, stating that the assessee had not filed all relevant details in his original return.
Held
The Tribunal held that the lower authorities erred in law and on facts by rejecting the loss claim based solely on the original return, as a revised return had been filed within the prescribed time. The original return should not have survived in light of the revised return.
Key Issues
Whether the lower authorities erred in rejecting the claim for carry forward of loss based on the original return when a revised return was filed.
Sections Cited
139(1), 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH “SMC”, DEHRADUN
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. Manish Agarwal
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DEHRADUN BENCH “SMC”, DEHRADUN Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. Manish Agarwal, Accountant Member ITA No. 128/DDN/2019 : Asstt. Year: 2015-16 Jagdish Vidyalankar, Vs Income Tax Officer, 348,, Alankar Bhawan, Jwalapur, Ward-1(3)(1), Haridwar, Uttarkhand-249408 Haridwar-249408 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAJPV0551A Assessee by : Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. & Sh. Shailesh Gupta, CA Revenue by : Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 16.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement: 30.03.2026 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2015-16, arises against the CIT(A), Dehradun’s order dated 13.06.2019 in case No. 10223/CIT(A)/DDN/2017-18, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant is aggrieved against both the learned lower authorities’ respective assessment findings dated 21.09.2017 as well as the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion declining his claim of carry forward loss of Rs.17,48,562/- in
2 ITA No. 128/DDN/2025 Jagdish Vidyalankar question. Both the learned lower authorities have admittedly held the assessee as not to have filed all the relevant details thereof in his section 139(1) return dated 30.08.2015.
Learned senior counsel on the other hand has invited the tribunal’s attention to the fact that the assessee had duly filed his revised return on 30.07.2016; and, therefore, both the lower authorities could not have simply ignored the same in a summary manner. We wish to reiterate here that the assessee’s revised return is admittedly not in issue in both the lower proceedings. We are accordingly of the considered view in light of PCIT Vs. Babubhai Ramabhai Patel (2017) 84 taxmann.com 32 (Guj.) that once a revised return filed within the prescribed time, the original one would not survive; to conclude that the learned lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in rejecting the assessee’s impugned loss claim based on the original return only. We therefore deem it appropriate to direct the learned Assessing Officer to frame his afresh appropriate computation as per law in the assessee’s case after verifying all the relevant details.
3 ITA No. 128/DDN/2025 Jagdish Vidyalankar
This assessee’s appeal is allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 30/03/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 30/03/2026 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
