Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

284 ITR 323Supreme Court of India2006#13 most cited

What is Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

An assessee cannot raise a new claim or a claim not made in the original or revised return of income for the first time directly before the Assessing Officer during assessment proceedings.

1,842

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,514 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Goetze (India) Ltd v CIT · new claim by assessee · additional ground · revised return of income · section 139(5) · Assessing Officer powers · CIT(A) powers · ITAT powers · assessment proceedings · fresh claim · 284 ITR 323

Also reported as

157 Taxmann 1204 CTR 182157 Taxmann.com 1

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 115JBSection 37(1)Section 147Section 153ASection 143(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 139(5)book profitssection 115jrevenue expendituresection 115jbcapital expendituredisallowance under section 14asection 32section 254section 37(1)transfer pricing adjustmentliable to tax

Judgments citing Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT

Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi vs. Ongc Videsh Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 7435/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2011-12
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 42

…interest on an item of expenditure. At best it is an expense that has to be allowed in future years. AO also mentioned that claim is not maintainable at the assessment stage in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Goetze India Limited vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC). Against the assessment order, appellant has raised following grounds on this issue: 8.1 That the Ld. AO has erred in not considering the claim of the appellant, filed during the assessment proceedings, for allowing deduction on account of contribution to site restoration fund amounting to Rs.60,219,264 as per Production Sharing Contract f…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Ongc Videsh Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6281/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 42

…interest on an item of expenditure. At best it is an expense that has to be allowed in future years. AO also mentioned that claim is not maintainable at the assessment stage in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Goetze India Limited vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC). Against the assessment order, appellant has raised following grounds on this issue: 8.1 That the Ld. AO has erred in not considering the claim of the appellant, filed during the assessment proceedings, for allowing deduction on account of contribution to site restoration fund amounting to Rs.60,219,264 as per Production Sharing Contract f…

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ongc Videsh Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 2119/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2010-11
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 42

…interest on an item of expenditure. At best it is an expense that has to be allowed in future years. AO also mentioned that claim is not maintainable at the assessment stage in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Goetze India Limited vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC). Against the assessment order, appellant has raised following grounds on this issue: 8.1 That the Ld. AO has erred in not considering the claim of the appellant, filed during the assessment proceedings, for allowing deduction on account of contribution to site restoration fund amounting to Rs.60,219,264 as per Production Sharing Contract f…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ongc Videsh Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3816/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2009-10
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 42

…interest on an item of expenditure. At best it is an expense that has to be allowed in future years. AO also mentioned that claim is not maintainable at the assessment stage in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Goetze India Limited vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC). Against the assessment order, appellant has raised following grounds on this issue: 8.1 That the Ld. AO has erred in not considering the claim of the appellant, filed during the assessment proceedings, for allowing deduction on account of contribution to site restoration fund amounting to Rs.60,219,264 as per Production Sharing Contract f…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ongc Videsh Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3210/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2008-09
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 42

…interest on an item of expenditure. At best it is an expense that has to be allowed in future years. AO also mentioned that claim is not maintainable at the assessment stage in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Goetze India Limited vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC). Against the assessment order, appellant has raised following grounds on this issue: 8.1 That the Ld. AO has erred in not considering the claim of the appellant, filed during the assessment proceedings, for allowing deduction on account of contribution to site restoration fund amounting to Rs.60,219,264 as per Production Sharing Contract f…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ongc Videsh Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3209/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Sept 2022AY 2007-08
Section 32(1)(ii)Section 42

…interest on an item of expenditure. At best it is an expense that has to be allowed in future years. AO also mentioned that claim is not maintainable at the assessment stage in view of Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Goetze India Limited vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC). Against the assessment order, appellant has raised following grounds on this issue: 8.1 That the Ld. AO has erred in not considering the claim of the appellant, filed during the assessment proceedings, for allowing deduction on account of contribution to site restoration fund amounting to Rs.60,219,264 as per Production Sharing Contract f…

Vijay Kumar, Saharanpur vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)4, Deoband

Appeal are allowed

ITA 1989/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 147Section 148Section 250

…1 Vijay Kumar Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vijay kumar, Vs Income-tax Officer, H. No. 34, V&PO Ghalauli, Ward-3(3)(4), Deoband, Distt. Saharanpur (U.P.) Distt. Saharanpur. PAN- ATVPK3589Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Sh. Rohitash Kumar Adv. & Sh. Prem Parakash, Adv. Respondent by Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17.08.2022 Date of pronouncement 31.08.2022 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (…

Sai Service Agency(B0Mbay) P Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -8, Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 490/PUN/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri G.D.Padmashaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.490/Pun/2021 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sai Service Agency (Bombay) The Dcit, Circle-8, Pune. Pvt. Ltd., Vs Mumbai Pune Road, . Phugewadi, Pune – 411012. Pan: Aaccs 5991 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Deepa Khare – Adv. Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Dr Date Of Hearing 17/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 30/08/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), Pune- 8’S Order Dated 05.08.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-8/Dcitc Cir-1(2)/202/18-19/188, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 80A(5)Section 80CSection 80G

…khs made in both the lower proceedings for want of the assessee’s revised return filed before the Assessing Officer. The Revenue quotes section 80A(5) read with section 80C of the Act as well as hon’ble apex court landmark decision in Goedtz India Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC) that both the lower authorities have rightly disallowed the impugned claim. 8. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant technical arguments since the foregoing twin provisions i.e. section 80A(5) read with section 80AC apply only in case of deduction claimed under section 10A, 10AA, 10B or 10BA and the heading “C” to Chapter-VI of the Act…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 11, Pune vs. Hsbc Software Development (India) Private Limited, Pune

In the result, CO of assessee is allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2348/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Respondent: Shri Percy Jal Pardiwalla
Section 10A(7)Section 10BSection 10B(7)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ax (Appeals) erred on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law in allowing alternate claim of the assessee for deduction u/s. 10A of the Act ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd vs CIT reported in 157 Taxmann 1, wherein it has been held that an assessee can amend a return filed by him for making a claim for deduction only by filing a revised return. 5. The Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law in allowing alternate claim of the assessee for deduction u/s. 10A of the Act ignoring deci…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 11, Pune vs. Hsbc Software Development (India) Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, CO of assessee is allowed and the appeals of Revenue are dismissed

ITA 1464/PUN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Respondent: Shri Percy Jal Pardiwalla
Section 10A(7)Section 10BSection 10B(7)Section 143(3)Section 80I

…ax (Appeals) erred on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law in allowing alternate claim of the assessee for deduction u/s. 10A of the Act ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd vs CIT reported in 157 Taxmann 1, wherein it has been held that an assessee can amend a return filed by him for making a claim for deduction only by filing a revised return. 5. The Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law in allowing alternate claim of the assessee for deduction u/s. 10A of the Act ignoring deci…

Shri Kandasamy Velayudam, Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 6(1), Chenai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 572/CHNY/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Aug 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 572/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17 Shri Kandasamy Velayudam, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 25/29, Sakthi Srinivasan Salai, Corporate Ward 6(1), Kumaran Kudil, Thoraipakkam, Chennai. Chennai 600 097. [Pan:Aempv6412K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Mrs. Sree Lakshmi Valli, Advocate Shri I. Dinesh, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 25.08.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.08.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

For Appellant: Mrs. Sree Lakshmi Valli, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 154

…t heed to the plea of the assessee and rejected the claim to modify the deduction since the assessee has not filed revised return under section 139(5) of the Act, by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT 284 ITR 323 (SC), the Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessee. On appeal, while dismissing the appeal of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the issue is not amenable to section 154 of the Act, and if at all, the issue should have been challenged by the assessee by an appeal against the order under section 143(3) of the Act dated 30.1…

Income Tax Officer (It) 3(1) (1), Mumbai vs. Armine Hamied Khan, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 834/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 54Section 54F

…rn of income filed for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in not following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India Ltd Vs CIT [(2006) 204 CTR 182 (SC)]? 2. The issue in appeal lies in a very narrow compass of material facts. The assessee before us is a non-resident lady, and it appears that she had tenancy rights in a residential apartment in the posh South Mumbai locality of Warden Road. She surrendered these tenancy rights for a consideration of Rs 4,76,80,552. The funds so received by…

Shree Global Tradefin Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT, Central Circle 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 511/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Sh. Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms. Vrunda Matkarni
Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…on 14A of the Act to the amount of suo moto disallowance of INR 78,12,599/- offered to tax by the Appellant in its return of income. In this regard she relied upon the decision of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Limited Vs. CIT: (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC). 8. We have heard the rival submissions and examined the material on record including the orders of authorities below. In the case of Marg Ltd. (supra) the assessee had itself offered disallowance in excess of the exempt income earned. The Hon‟ble Madras High Court held that disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D cannot…

Divine Grace Green Farming and Marketing Multi State Co. Op. Soc.Ltd., Siddhpur vs. ACIT, Mehsana Circle, Mehsana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1421/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. DR
Section 37Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

…ITA No.1421/Ahd/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC-1” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Divine Grace Green Farming and vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Marketing Multi State Co-operative Mehsana Circle, Mehsana. Society Limited, 8/10/3B, Nr. Navjivan Hotel, Kakoshi Char Rasta, Siddhpur – 384 151. [PAN – AAAAD 6412 A] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Hardik Vora, AR Respondent by : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 15.07.2022 Date of pron…

International Commission on Irrigation & Drainage Employees Provident Fund Trust, New Delhi vs. DDIT (E) Trust Circle-2, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 704/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Khare, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: ShriAnujGarg, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(25)(ii)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250

…income within due date as prescribed under the Statute, sought the rectification of the order by filing the application u/s. 154 of the Act which stands dismissed and affirmed by the Ld. Commissioner. [8] 7.3 In the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323, the Hon’ble Apex Court laid down the dictum that the assessee cannot be allowed to make a claim of deduction other than filing the revised return. The Hon’ble Apex Court further held that the issue in this case is limited to the power of the Assessing Officer and does not impinge on the powers u/s. 254 of the Act. From the dictum of the Hon’ble…

International Commission on Irrigation & Drainage Employees Provident Fund Trust, New Delhi vs. DDIT (E) Trust Circle-2, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 703/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Khare, Ld. AdvFor Respondent: ShriAnujGarg, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 10Section 10(25)(ii)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 250

…income within due date as prescribed under the Statute, sought the rectification of the order by filing the application u/s. 154 of the Act which stands dismissed and affirmed by the Ld. Commissioner. [8] 7.3 In the case of Goetz (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323, the Hon’ble Apex Court laid down the dictum that the assessee cannot be allowed to make a claim of deduction other than filing the revised return. The Hon’ble Apex Court further held that the issue in this case is limited to the power of the Assessing Officer and does not impinge on the powers u/s. 254 of the Act. From the dictum of the Hon’ble…

Edelweiss Financail Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1328/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 90

…/-. The ld. AO did not take cognizance of the same and there was absolutely no discussion regarding the same in his assessment order. The ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd., reported in 284 ITR 323 stated that this revised claim was only made by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and the same was not claimed by way of a valid return of income, the same cannot be entertained. 8.3. We find that the decision of the Goetze India Ltd., referred to supra clearly enables the appellate authorities to consider the claim made b…

Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1283/MUM/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2012-13
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 90

…/-. The ld. AO did not take cognizance of the same and there was absolutely no discussion regarding the same in his assessment order. The ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd., reported in 284 ITR 323 stated that this revised claim was only made by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and the same was not claimed by way of a valid return of income, the same cannot be entertained. 8.3. We find that the decision of the Goetze India Ltd., referred to supra clearly enables the appellate authorities to consider the claim made b…

Edelweiss Finanacial Services Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -CC-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1197/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Aug 2022AY 2013-14
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 90

…/-. The ld. AO did not take cognizance of the same and there was absolutely no discussion regarding the same in his assessment order. The ld. CIT(A) by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd., reported in 284 ITR 323 stated that this revised claim was only made by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and the same was not claimed by way of a valid return of income, the same cannot be entertained. 8.3. We find that the decision of the Goetze India Ltd., referred to supra clearly enables the appellate authorities to consider the claim made b…

M/S Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6-3, Jaipur

ITA 689/JPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Sandeep JhanwarFor Respondent: Sh. Prathviraj Meena (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 40Section 43B

…is in relation to the completing the assessment without considering the revised return of income filed in time by the assessee company. For this ground the ld. CIT(A) has recorded his finding that the apex court in the case of Goetze India Limited Vs. CIT 284 ITR 323 that the ITAT can consider such claim of the assessee made by the assessee in revised return of income. He further noted that the apex court did not consider this liberty to the CIT(A) and thus he has confirmed the view of the assessee. Since, there is no other adverse observation about the valid revised return M/s Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Lt…