Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE
O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member
This appeal by the assessee is against the order dated 10.3.2015 of the CIT(Appeals)-IV, Bangalore relating to assessment year 2010-11.
The assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacture of tools & dyes and machined components. For AY 2010-11, assessee filed return of income declaring a loss of Rs.18,51,842. During the previous year, assessee received dividend income of Rs.7,99,422, but the same was exempt u/s. 10 of the Act. The assessee filed revised computation in the course of assessment proceedings claiming dividend income as exempt and also offered a disallowance of expenses incurred in earning exempt income u/s. 14A of the Act of a sum of Rs.83,639.
The Assessing Officer did not consider the revised computation of total income filed by the assessee and doing so, followed the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetze India Ltd. v. CIT, 284 ITR 323 (SC), wherein it was held that the Assessing Officer cannot consider any claim in the absence of a valid revised return filed by the assessee.
Before the CIT(Appeals), the assessee pointed out the restriction imposed in the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetze India Ltd. (supra) was applicable only to the Assessing Officer and not to the appellate authority under the Act. The CIT(Appeals) was of the view that reference to the appellate authority is only to the Tribunal in the aforesaid judgment and therefore even he could not entertain a revised computation of income and that the revised return ought to have been filed by the assessee.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.
We have heard the rival submissions. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Goetze India Ltd. (supra) in para 4 of its judgment observed as follows:-
“4. The decision in question is that the power of the Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is to entertain for the first time a point of law provided the fact on the basis of which the issue of law can be raised before the Tribunal. The decision does not in any way relate to the power of the Assessing Officer to entertain a claim for deduction otherwise than by filing a revised return. In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the civil appeal. However, we make it clear that the issue in this case is limited to the power of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-lax Act, 1961. There shall be no order as to costs”.
A perusal of the aforesaid observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court makes it abundantly clear that the Tribunal has the power to entertain a claim de hors revised return of income. The claim of assessee requires examination by the AO and therefore, we set aside the order of CIT(Appeals) on this issue and remand the issue to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Pronounced in the open court on this 14th day of August, 2015.