← All Phrases

“revised return”

Assessment ProceduresSection 139(5)Section 139(5)10,551 judgments

The decision most relied on for revised return is Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT (284 ITR 323), cited in 1,842 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on revised return

Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT
284 ITR 323 · 2006 · Supreme Court
1,842
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

CIT v. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd.
306 ITR 42 · 2008 · High Court
349
citing judgments

An assessee can make an additional claim for deduction or file a revised computation of income during assessment proceedings, even if a revised return of income has not been filed. Such additional claims or grounds can also be admitted at the appellate stage.

CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd.
341 ITR 293 · 2012 · High Court
205
citing judgments

A Commissioner can revise an assessment order under Section 263 if it is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. This includes cases where the Assessing Officer fails to make further inquiries before accepting the assessee's statements in the return.

CIT v. Suresh Chandra Mittal
251 ITR 9 · 2001 · Supreme Court
179
citing judgments

A penalty under section 271(1)(c) for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income is not automatically leviable merely because a higher income is declared, even after a search or in a voluntarily revised return. The initial burden to prove concealment or inaccurate particulars lies with the Revenue.

Madhya Pradesh in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Suresh Chandra Mittal
241 ITR 124 · 2000 · High Court
89
citing judgments

A penalty for concealment of income cannot be levied if an assessee files a revised return to buy peace and avoid litigation, and the revenue accepts this without objection.

Duggal & Co. v. CIT
220 ITR 456 · 1996 · High Court
84
citing judgments

An assessment order becomes erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer fails to conduct a proper inquiry or investigation, even if the return appears prima facie correct. The Income-tax Officer has a duty to investigate and cannot remain passive.

35. In Virbhadra Singh (HUF) v. Pr. CIT
298 CTR 393 · 2017 · High Court
76
citing judgments

Where no inquiry was conducted by the Assessing Officer in passing an assessment order after accepting a revised return, the Commissioner acts within their power under section 263 to direct a fresh assessment.

Judgments citing revised return

Malabar Cements Ltd, Walayar vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Palakkad

ITA 255/COCH/2021[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Harikrishnan Unny, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 250

return of income electronically as per details given below. Assessment Date of filing Income Date of filing Income year original return declared – Rs. revised return declared

ACIT, Kochi vs. Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 35/COCH/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

ACIT, Kochi vs. Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 34/COCH/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

ACIT, Kochi vs. Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 33/COCH/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

Malabar Cements Ltd, Walayar vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Palakkad

ITA 257/COCH/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Harikrishnan Unny, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 250

return of income electronically as per details given below. Assessment Date of filing Income Date of filing Income year original return declared – Rs. revised return declared

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 311/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The ACIT, Kochi vs. The Federal Bank Ltd, Ernakulam

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 310/COCH/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The ACIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 309/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 275/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 274/COCH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 273/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 272/COCH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 747/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 746/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

The Federal Bank Ltd, Aluva vs. The ACIT, Kochi

In the result, appeals of the Assessee and revenue for AY 2008-09 to 2010-

ITA 745/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathy

For Appellant: Shri Rajesekharan, CA and Shri K.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J. M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR, Cochin
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

claimed or allowed in earlier years now allowable on sale of securities. A claim was therefore made before the AO but without filing a revised return of income. The AO did not entertain the revised claim of the Assessee on the ground that such a claim was not made ... held that the AO cannot entertain any claim by an Assessee without such claim being made in the return of income or a revised return of income. On appeal by the Assessee CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. 20. Aggrieved by the orders

Dy.CIT Circle 2(1) (1), Mumbai vs. Hariomkar Food Products Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1154/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Dy. Cit, Circle-2(1)(1) Hariomkar Food Products Private Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. 207 Shyam Kamal Complex, Mumbai-400 020 Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 057

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 250Section 32A

declaring current year loss at Rs.7,79,84,343/- and deemed total income u/s.115JB at Rs.7,79,84,343/-. The assessee filed its revised return dated 04.09.2018, declaring current year loss at Rs.14,12,48,379/- and deemed total income u/s.115JB of the Act (-) 7,79,84,343/-. The assessee

Rohit Infra Projects P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2, Thane

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

ITA 2437/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Gagan Goyal, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2437/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) Rohit Infra Projects Pvt. बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2 Ltd. B, Wing, Ashar I. T. Park, Vs. A-1/103, Orchid Plaza, R. Wagle Estate, Thane. T. Road, Dahisar, Mumbai- 400068. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcr4744C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By: Shri T. Sankar (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 16/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/12/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune Dated 31.01.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Assessee Had Filed The Revised Return Of Income For Ay. 2013-14 On 19.03.2015 Which Has Not Been Taken Into Consideration By The Ao, Before Framing The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act On 27.03.2015, Therefore, The Assessment Need To Be Made De-Novo.

For Appellant: Shri Dharan GandhiFor Respondent: Shri T. Sankar (DR)
Section 133(6)Section 139(1)Section 143(3)

Pune dated 31.01.2017 for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. The main grievance of the assessee is that the assessee had filed the revised return of income for AY. 2013-14 on 19.03.2015 which has not been taken into consideration by the AO, before framing the assessment order passed ... assessee pointed out that in this case the assessee is raising the preliminary objection to the action of the AO in not considering the revised return of income filed by the assessee on 3 A.Y. 2013-14 Rohit Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. 19.03.2015 which fact is evident from the admission

Sandoz P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for assessment years 2005-06

ITA 3871/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Mane
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

processed and intimation under section 143(1) was issued on 23/01/2007 by the ACIT, Circle–7(1) Mumbai. Thereafter, the assessee filed its revised return of income on 30/03/2007 with the ACIT, Circle–7(1) Mumbai. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Act along with a questionnaire ... dated 13/10/2021, having 9 pages, was filed for the assessment year 2006–07, wherein the copy of the acknowledgment of return of income and revised return of income filed with DCIT, Circle-7(1), Mumbai is placed on record. From the said factual paper book, we find that

Sandoz P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for assessment years 2005-06

ITA 3870/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Mane
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

processed and intimation under section 143(1) was issued on 23/01/2007 by the ACIT, Circle–7(1) Mumbai. Thereafter, the assessee filed its revised return of income on 30/03/2007 with the ACIT, Circle–7(1) Mumbai. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Act along with a questionnaire ... dated 13/10/2021, having 9 pages, was filed for the assessment year 2006–07, wherein the copy of the acknowledgment of return of income and revised return of income filed with DCIT, Circle-7(1), Mumbai is placed on record. From the said factual paper book, we find that

DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Sandoz P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals by the assessee for assessment years 2005-06

ITA 3740/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Mane
Section 120(4)(b)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

processed and intimation under section 143(1) was issued on 23/01/2007 by the ACIT, Circle–7(1) Mumbai. Thereafter, the assessee filed its revised return of income on 30/03/2007 with the ACIT, Circle–7(1) Mumbai. Subsequently, notice under section 143(2) of the Act along with a questionnaire ... dated 13/10/2021, having 9 pages, was filed for the assessment year 2006–07, wherein the copy of the acknowledgment of return of income and revised return of income filed with DCIT, Circle-7(1), Mumbai is placed on record. From the said factual paper book, we find that