M/S RAJASTHAN STATE FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

ITA 835/JPR/2017Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 September 2026AY 2013-1420 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the claim for set-off of brought forward losses for AY 2012-13 was allowable. While the assessee did not dispute the revised return being non-est, the Tribunal noted that courts have consistently held that lawful claims can be entertained at the appellate stage even if not made in the original or revised return. The reliance on M/s Goetze India Pvt. Ltd. by the revenue was deemed misplaced as it pertained to the AO's powers, whereas the principle of allowing claims at the appellate stage, as laid down in NTPC and other cases, was applicable. Therefore, the CIT(A) was bound to allow the claim. Regarding the amounts transferred to the Consumer Welfare Fund, the Tribunal found no merit in the revenue's contention. Based on government guidelines, particularly a letter clarifying that the surplus would not be the corporation's income and that the assessee was a mere custodian, the Tribunal held that these amounts did not constitute the assessee's income. The assessee had no control over the utilization of these funds, and therefore, they could not be considered income. Ground No. 2 for AY 2012-13 was allowed, and by extension, Ground No. 1 for AY 2013-14 was also allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for Assessment Years (AY) 2012-13 and 2013-14. The appeals challenged the rejection of claims for brought forward losses and the addition of amounts transferred to a Consumer Welfare Fund as income. For AY 2012-13, the assessee initially did not claim set-off of brought forward losses of Rs. 43,15,461/- in its belated original return. A revised computation of income was filed later, claiming this set-off. The Assessing Officer (AO) and CIT(A) held the revised return as non-est and denied the claim. For both AYs, a significant sum transferred to the Consumer Welfare Fund was treated as the assessee's income by the revenue authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the claim for set-off of brought forward losses of Rs. 43,15,461/- for AY 2012-13, made through a revised return after the original return was belated, is allowable, considering the decisions in M/s Goetze India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT and CIT vs. NTPC. - Assessee's contention: Lawful claims are allowable at the appellate stage even if not made in the return, and the revenue cannot benefit from the assessee's omission or ignorance. Relied on CIT vs. M/s. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders Pvt. Ltd., CIT vs. Ramco International, NTPC, and others. - Revenue's contention: The revised return was non-est as the original return was belated, citing M/s Goetze India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT. 2. Whether the amounts transferred by the assessee to the Consumer Welfare Fund, aggregating Rs. 6,60,08,530/- for AY 2012-13 and Rs. 18,62,22,230/- for AY 2013-14, constitute the assessee's income, given the State Government's guidelines. - Assessee's contention: The amounts were not the assessee's income but were held as a custodian as per government guidelines, which clarified the surplus would not be the corporation's income. - Revenue's contention: The funds remained part of the corporation's corpus as they were to be utilized for specific purposes including compensating the corporation, market intervention, consumer welfare, and strengthening the corporation's structure, implying an accrual of income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, “B” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI UDAYAN DAS GUPTA

For Appellant: Ms. Satika Jha, Adv &, Adv P a g e | 2
Hearing: 01.07.2026Pronounced: 29.09.2026

Per Annapurna Gupta, AM:- The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the separate orders passed by the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal CIT(A), Jaipur 02(hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”), dated 30.03.2017 and 03.08.2017under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinaft

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →