SUDHA DHOOT,KOLKATA vs. AO WORD 40 (4), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the assessee filed the return for AY 2017-18 before the due date for audited cases, the short-term capital loss claimed was eligible for carry forward. Therefore, the denial of set off was incorrect.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed set off of brought forward short-term capital loss for AY 2019-20. The CPC denied this claim, and the CIT(A) upheld the denial, stating the return for AY 2017-18 was filed late. However, the assessee's books were audited, and the return for AY 2017-18 was filed before the extended due date for audited cases.
What were the issues?
Whether a short-term capital loss can be carried forward and set off if the return for the year in which the loss occurred was filed before the due date for audited cases, even if that date was later than the general due date.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 139(1),Section 143(1),Section 44AB,Section 250,Section 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey
Sudha Dhoot Vs. DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru 29B, Rabindra Sarani, 3rd Floor, Room No. 10E, Kolkata-700073. (PAN: ADWPD2538F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appearances by: N o n e appeared for the Appellant Shri L. N. Dash, Addl. CIT (DR) appeared for Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : 09.05.2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 28.05.2024 ORDER
Per Manish Borad, Accountant Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short “AY”) 2019-20 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) by ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/Addl/JCIT(A0-12, Mumbai [in short Ld. “CIT(A)”] dated 12.12.2023 arising out of the Intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act by DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru (in short “AO”), dated 06.11.2017.
When the case was called for, neither any one appeared on behalf of the assessee nor filed any adjournment application. With the assistance of Ld. DR, we dispose of the appeal.
Sudha Dhoot, AY: 2019-20 3. However, various documents have been uploaded along with the e-mail filed on the portal of this Tribunal. We, therefore, decide to adjudicate the appeal with the assistance of the Ld. CIT, DR and the material available on record. The only grievance of the assessee is that Ld. CIT(A0 erred in confirming the action of the AO disallowing the claim of set off of short term capital loss of Rs.18,98,727/-.
We have heard submissions of Ld. CIT, DR and perused the material available on record. We observe that the assessee filed the return of income for AY 2019-20 on 28.09.2019 declaring total income of Rs.26,944/-. The assessee is required to get its accounts audited and the tax audit report has duly been furnished. However, when the return was processed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act set off of brought forward of short term capital loss of Rs.17,98,727/- was denied. Assessee made all efforts by filing the application u/s. 154 of the Act stating that the return for Ay 2017-18 was furnished well within the time limit prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act and a correct claim of carry forward of short term capital loss was made therein but the CPC did not grant any relief. When the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A), submissions were reiterated stating that a valid claim of set off of brought forward short term capital loss has been made. However, the Ld. CIT(A) denied the claim observing that since the assessee has furnished the return for AY 2017-18 after the due date, the loss claimed therein cannot be carried forward.
We observe that the books of accounts of the assessee are duly audited and even for AY 2017-18 assessee was required to get its accounts audited. Now, as per section 139(1) of the Act, for the assessee, who are required to get the books of account audited u/s. 44AB of the Act the due date for AY 2017-18 was 31.10.2017. Prior to the due date of 31.10.2017, assessee had filed return of income on
More judgments on Section 139(1)
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal…ITA 658/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal…ITA 485/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Mata Lachmi Rotary Charitable Society… vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward - 1…ITA 310/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S South INDIA Trading Company vs. Additional Commissioner Adjudication CGST Delhi North & Anr.Delhi · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Rishi Stonex vs. The State Of Assam And 5 OthersGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- Gopal Datt vs. Vishal Kumar SharmaUttarakhand · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Do Nam Enterprise And Anr vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 OrsGauhati · 13 Oct 2026
- M Sundaravel vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Central GST And Central ExciseMadras · 13 Oct 2026