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 367,842 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

DCIT, Trivandrum vs. Brahmos Aerospace( Thiruvananthapuram) Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeal filedby

ITA 742/COCH/2019[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin23 Feb 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am Deputy Commissioner Brahmos Aerospace Of Income Tax, (Thiruvananthapuram) Ltd., Circle-1(1), V. Chackai, Thiruvananthapuram Beach Post, Kerala Tiruvananthapuram, Kerala Pan – Aabck2217K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv
Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 80

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri George Mathan, JM & Shri Ramit Kochar, AM Deputy Commissioner Brahmos Aerospace of Income Tax, (Thiruvananthapuram) Ltd., Circle-1(1), v. Chackai, Thiruvananthapuram Beach Post, Kerala Tiruvananthapuram, Kerala PAN – AABCK2217K Appellant Respondent Appellant by :Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR Respondent by :Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv. Date of Hearing : 23.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 23.02.2022 O R D E R Per Shri Ramit Kochar, AM: This appeal, filed by Revenue, being ITA No.742/Coch/2019, is directed against the appellate order dated 10…

Shri. Rajesh Devraj Mehra, Mumbai vs. ITO 10 (1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4909/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy () & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

…nd that there was no provision under the Income-tax Act to make amendment in the return of income by filing an application at the assessment stage without revising the return. Goetze (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax [2006] 157 Taxman 1 (SC)/[2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC)/[2006] 204 15. The circular No.14(XL-35) of 1955, dated 11.04.1955 referred to by the learned representative before us has no bearing to the facts of the present case as the loss was never disclosed by the assessee in the return of income file by 6 ITA 4909/Mum/2019 him. In view of the foregoing, we are of the view that the concurrent findi…

M/S. Jeans Knit Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 706/BANG/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2012-13 Jeans Knit Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of No.21-E1, 2nd Phase, Income-tax, Industrial Area, Peenya, Circle-4(1)(1), Bengaluru-560 058. Bengaluru. PAN – AABCJ 4513 B APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Tanmayee Rajkumar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 09.02.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 22.02.2022 O R D E R Per Padmavathy S, Accountant Member This appeal by the assessee is directed against t…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1 Kolkata vs. Bangiya Gramin Vikash Bank

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no order as

ITAT/17/2021HC Calcutta21 Feb 2022

Bench: :

Section 115Section 115JSection 2(24)Section 260A

…tal receipts instead of revenue receipts as claimed in original return. The Assessing Officer had denied this claim. The Revenue has attacked the order of the Tribunal by relying on the decision in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). This case does not help the Revenue/appellant. In this case the Supreme Court has made it clear that its decision was restricted to the power of the assessing authority to entertain a claim for deduction otherwise than by a revised return, and did not impinge on the power of the Appellate Tribunal under section 254 of the Income-ta…

M/S.L.G Petrochemicals Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1954/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Smt.Pratibha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Vandana Sagar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 438Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “C”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Ms.Padmavathy S, AM ITA No.1954/Bang/2016 : Asst.Year 2008-2009 M/s.I.G.Petrochemicals Limited The Deputy Commissioner of D-4, Jyothi Complex Income-tax, Circle (3)(1)(1) v. Bengaluru. H.No.1/32/38/103 134/1 Infantry Road Bangalore – 560 001. PAN : AAACI4115R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Smt.Pratibha, Advocate Respondent by : Smt.Vandana Sagar, CIT-DR Date of Pronouncement : 21.02.2022 Date of Hearing : 16.02.2022 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is di…

S K G Refractories Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-3(2), Hyderabad

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 342/HYD/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2006-07 Skg Refractories Limited, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Hyderabad – 500063. Income Tax, Circle 3(2), Pan : Aadcs4040G. Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Samuel Nagadesi. Revenue By: Shri T. Sunil Goutam. Date Of Hearing: 16.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 18.02.2022 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M.

For Appellant: Shri Samuel NagadesiFor Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Goutam
Section 139(5)Section 143Section 154Section 154(1)(b)Section 176Section 43BSection 43B(5)

…06; very well after the impugned amendment (clarificatory in nature) had 8 nowhere even sought deduction u/s 43B of the Act. It had also chosen not to file any revised return as well. Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision in Goetze (India) Ltd Vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 has settled the law that the Assessing Officer is not empowered to entertain any deduction claim in absence of a revised return. Be that as it may, we are of the opinion that once the assessee’s computation or return had not even claimed the impugned relief, the Assessing Officer could be hardly held to have committed any apparent error on record…

Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Bip Developers (P) Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITAT/165/2021HC Calcutta10 Feb 2022

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice T.S. Sivagnanam A N D The Hon’Ble Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya Date : February 10, 2022. [Via Video Conference] Appearance : Mr. S.N. Dutta, Adv. … For The Appellant Mr. Pratyush Jhunjhunwala, Adv. Mr. Indranil Banerjee, Adv. Mr. S. Rudra, Adv. … For The Respondent The Court : This Appeal By The Revenue Filed Under Section 260A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Brevity) Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18Th December, 2019 Passed By The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) In Ita No. 1366/Kol/2019 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Substantial Questions Of Law For Consideration: A) Whether The Itat Has Jurisdiction Or Authority To Override The Statutory Provision Of Law As By The

Section 139(5)Section 260A

…the assessment proceeding. The assessing officer non-suited the assessee on the ground that such a claim could not have been made by the assessee without filing a revised return. In the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Court in Goetze India Ltd. vs. CIT : 284 ITR 323 (SC), the legal issue is no longer res integra. The decision of Goetze India does not impinge on the power of the appellate authority and it only deals with the power of the assessing officer to entertain an additional claim without the revised return. The identical issue was considered by us in the case of PCIT vs. Eastern Coalfeilds Ltd. in ITA…

M/S. Tejas Networks Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 582/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

…hich it was held as under:- 8. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. Before us, the Ld D.R contended that the assessee could make fresh claims only by filing revised return of income by placing reliance on the decision of Goetz India Ltd.(284 ITR 323). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the above said case, has specifically held that its decision will not impinge upon the powers of the Tribunal to admit additional claims. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case of Karnataka State Co-operative Federation Ltd (supra) that the assessee could raised fresh claim before appellate…

M/S Tejats Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1674/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

…hich it was held as under:- 8. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. Before us, the Ld D.R contended that the assessee could make fresh claims only by filing revised return of income by placing reliance on the decision of Goetz India Ltd.(284 ITR 323). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the above said case, has specifically held that its decision will not impinge upon the powers of the Tribunal to admit additional claims. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case of Karnataka State Co-operative Federation Ltd (supra) that the assessee could raised fresh claim before appellate…

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 694/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

…hich it was held as under:- 8. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. Before us, the Ld D.R contended that the assessee could make fresh claims only by filing revised return of income by placing reliance on the decision of Goetz India Ltd.(284 ITR 323). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the above said case, has specifically held that its decision will not impinge upon the powers of the Tribunal to admit additional claims. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case of Karnataka State Co-operative Federation Ltd (supra) that the assessee could raised fresh claim before appellate…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 621/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

…hich it was held as under:- 8. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. Before us, the Ld D.R contended that the assessee could make fresh claims only by filing revised return of income by placing reliance on the decision of Goetz India Ltd.(284 ITR 323). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the above said case, has specifically held that its decision will not impinge upon the powers of the Tribunal to admit additional claims. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case of Karnataka State Co-operative Federation Ltd (supra) that the assessee could raised fresh claim before appellate…

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 468/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

…hich it was held as under:- 8. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. Before us, the Ld D.R contended that the assessee could make fresh claims only by filing revised return of income by placing reliance on the decision of Goetz India Ltd.(284 ITR 323). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the above said case, has specifically held that its decision will not impinge upon the powers of the Tribunal to admit additional claims. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case of Karnataka State Co-operative Federation Ltd (supra) that the assessee could raised fresh claim before appellate…

Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 296/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

…hich it was held as under:- 8. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. Before us, the Ld D.R contended that the assessee could make fresh claims only by filing revised return of income by placing reliance on the decision of Goetz India Ltd.(284 ITR 323). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the above said case, has specifically held that its decision will not impinge upon the powers of the Tribunal to admit additional claims. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case of Karnataka State Co-operative Federation Ltd (supra) that the assessee could raised fresh claim before appellate…

DCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1119/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

…hich it was held as under:- 8. We heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. Before us, the Ld D.R contended that the assessee could make fresh claims only by filing revised return of income by placing reliance on the decision of Goetz India Ltd.(284 ITR 323). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the above said case, has specifically held that its decision will not impinge upon the powers of the Tribunal to admit additional claims. The Hon’ble Karnataka High Court has held in the case of Karnataka State Co-operative Federation Ltd (supra) that the assessee could raised fresh claim before appellate…

Srf Limited, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 1, Ltu, New Delhi

Appeals are allowed

ITA 6693/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: The Hearing Of The Appeal.

Section 28Section 37

…appellant. The appellant raised the issue of exclusion of CER from total income before the DRP for the first time, which refused to entertain the claim of the assessee primarily relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme court in Goetze (India) Limited vs CIT 284 ITR 323. The tribunal taking note of the facts and judgments on the issue allowed the appeal of the assessee with following findings: - “41. Thus, SRF Ltd. vs. ACIT taking into consideration resolution of litigation on this issue by the Legislature itself, which had made provision for taxation of such receipts at the rate of 10% from the assessment yea…

Income Tax Officer, Jagdalpur vs. Shri Raja Vikram, Bastar

ITA 347/RPR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur02 Feb 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 347/Rpr/2014 नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2007-08 The Income Tax Officer Dist. Bastar (C.G) .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S. Shri Raja Vikram P/O. M/S. Vikas Associate ( Engineers), Jeypore Road, Kumharpara, Jagdalpur, Dist. Bastar (C.G) Pan : Acopr6013N ……प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.N Singh, DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 2(14)(iii)Section 54B

…is not permissible for an assessee to raise a fresh claim for deduction otherwise than by filing a revised return of income. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). At the same time, we cannot also remain oblivious of the fact, that as observed by the Hon‟ble Apex Court in its aforesaid order in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra), the limitation in entertaining a claim for deduction otherwise than by filing a revised return of income is limited to the power of the assessing authority and does not…

Deutsche Cib Centre P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 12(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2179/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2022AY 2010-11
Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(5)Section 37

…claim of deduction under section 10A of the Act but rejected the revised claim on the ground that same has not been filed through revised return of income by relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Pvt. Ltd reported in 284 ITR 323. In further proceedings, the ld. DRP rejected the objections raised by assessee and disallowed enhanced claim of deduction under section 10A on the basis that no CA certificate has been enclosed with letter dated 04.03.2014 filed before the ld. AO. Thereafter the ld. AO passed the final assessment order in accordance with the directions of the ld…

Ramjee Concretes Pvt.Ltd., Mohali vs. ITO-Ward-6(3), Chandigarh

The appeals are disposed of in the aforesaid terms

ITA 205/CHANDI/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh17 Jan 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 205/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20 Ramjee Concretes Private Limited, The Ito, बनाम #1238.Sector 91, Ward 6(3), Mohali, Punjab Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aafcr9457E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.N. Singla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250

…e amounts paid by it as “cess”. She submits that neither was any such claim made by filing any revised return before the Assessing Officer. She therefore relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) to submit that ITA No. 205-Chd-2021 Ramjee Concretes Private Limited, Chandigarh 19 the Assessing Officer, was not only quite right in denying such a deduction, but further the Assessing Officer had no power or jurisdiction to grant such a deduction to the Appellant – Assessee. She submits that this is what precisely held by the ITAT in its…

Falaknuma Palace Trust., Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-9(4)., Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1122/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara(Through Video Conference) M/S. Falaknuma Palace Vs. Income Tax Officer, Trust, Hyderabad. Ward 9(4), Hyderabad. Pan Aaatf 2015K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, C.AFor Respondent: Shri T. Sunil Goutam (D.R.)
Section 143(3)

…. Goutam vehemently reiterated the Revenue’s stand that the assessee had not claimed any such claim either in the original return or in its revised return to this effect before the assessing authority. He quotes case law Goetz (India) Limited Vs. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC) that the Assessing Officer is precluded from entertaining such a claim raised otherwise than by filing of a revised return. 4. We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant arguments as their lordships have made it clear in para 4 that the said precedent applies to powers of the assessing authority only and does not impinge upon the appella…

Mr. Shripad A. Shelar, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT - Cir_34(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2023/MUM/2020[203-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jan 2022

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 54Section 56(2)(vii)

…d working of the LTCG and claimed LTCG at Rs 55,41,025/- and also claimed the entire LTCG as exemption u/s 54. However, since the claim was not made by the assessee while filing the return of income, the AO relying upon the decision of Goetze India Ltd (2006) 284 ITR 323 restricted the exemption claimed u/s 54 at Rs 39,03,025/- and added the balance amount of Rs 16,38,000/- as LTCG. The action of the AO is fair and reasonable and well within the law and therefore no interference is called for. 5. Against the above order, assessee is in appeal before ITAT. 6. I have heard both the parties and perused the records…