← 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.

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.

Pr. CIT v. Ankit Metal & Power Ltd.
109 Taxmann.com 93 · 2019 · High Court
77
citing judgments

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has the power under Section 254 to entertain a claim for deduction not made in the original return of income or a revised return filed before the Assessing Officer.

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

Mudunuri Sridevi, Bhimavaram vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Bhimavaram

In the result, appeals of the assessees are allowed

ITA 421/VIZ/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.421-423/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2012-13) . Smt. Mudunuri Sridevi Vs Income Tax Officer D.No.27-17-63 Ward-2 Asr Nagar Bhimavaram Bhimavaram West Godavari Dist. [Pan :Bdupm6273P] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.573-575/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2010-11 To 2012-13) Shri Mudunuri Subba Raju Vs. Income Tax Officer F.No.100, R R Enclave Ward-2 Opp.Aditya Public School Bhimavaram Suryanarayanapuram Bhimavaram West Godavari Dist. [Pan : Adlpm6979Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13.02.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 148

Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ in short). 2.1. In response to the notice issued u/s 148, the assessee has filed the revised returns of income admitting the income at Rs.15,000/- per acre of water spread area on estimation basis. Subsequently, the assessment was taken up for scrutiny ... Accordingly made the addition of Rs.9,00,000/- in each case. As per the assessments completed by the AO, the returned income originally, the revised return of income and the assessed income in the case of both the assessees are as under : Smt.Mudunuri Sridevi Shri Mudunuri Subba Raju Revised Revised

ITO, Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam vs. Sri Padmavathi Real Estate Consultancies, Visakhaptnam

ITA 32/VIZ/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.31 & 32/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Income Tax Officer Vs. Sri Padmavathi Real Estate Ward-1(4) Consultancies Visakhapatnam D.No.10-27-14/A, Kailasmetta Waltair Uplands Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aaifs3523N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.16 & 17/Viz/2018 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.31 & 32/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Sri Padmavathi Real Estate Vs. Income Tax Officer Consultancies Ward-1(4) D.No.10-27-14/A, Kailasmetta Visakhapatnam Waltair Uplands Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aaifs3523N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13 .02.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)

admitted additional income of Rs.2,07,00,000/- representing outstanding liabilities in the balance sheet. Subsequent to survey, the assessee firm filed revised return of income on 28.10.2011 declaring total income of Rs.2,12,93,770/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed on total

ITO, Ward-1(4), Visakhapatnam vs. Sri Padmavathi Real Estate Consultancies, Visakhapatnam

ITA 31/VIZ/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.31 & 32/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Income Tax Officer Vs. Sri Padmavathi Real Estate Ward-1(4) Consultancies Visakhapatnam D.No.10-27-14/A, Kailasmetta Waltair Uplands Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aaifs3523N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.16 & 17/Viz/2018 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.31 & 32/Viz/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Sri Padmavathi Real Estate Vs. Income Tax Officer Consultancies Ward-1(4) D.No.10-27-14/A, Kailasmetta Visakhapatnam Waltair Uplands Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aaifs3523N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13 .02.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 133ASection 143(1)

admitted additional income of Rs.2,07,00,000/- representing outstanding liabilities in the balance sheet. Subsequent to survey, the assessee firm filed revised return of income on 28.10.2011 declaring total income of Rs.2,12,93,770/-. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed on total

ITO, Ward-3(3), Visakhapatnam vs. Shri K V V Prasad, Visakhapatnam

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 457/VIZ/2017[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 Feb 2019AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.375/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Smt.Siripurapu Chinatalli Ward-3(3) D.No.9-16-37/2 Visakhapatnam Gurajada Enclave Cbm Compound Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agrpc1150E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.457/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2008-09) Income Tax Officer Vs. Shri K.V.V.Prasad Ward-3(3) Plot No.301, Vytla Residency Visakhapatnam Balajinagar Siripuram Visakhapatnam (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2019 : 13.02.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri G.V.N.Hari, AR
Section 271(1)(c)

Rs.66,000/-. Subsequently, 3 I.T.A. Nos.375/Viz/2017 and 457/Viz/2017 Smt. Siripurapu Chinatalli and Shri K.V.V.Prasad, Visakhapatnam during the assessment proceedings, the assessee filed a revised return declaring ‘NIL' income. In both the returns of Smt.Chinnatalli and Shri K.V.V.Prasad, the assessees have appended the notes relating to the amount received by them ... K.V.V. Prasad have paid advance tax of Rs.36,30,000/- and Rs.21,20,000/- respectively for the A.Y under consideration. Subsequently they filed their revised returns of incomes revising the income to ‘Nil’ and claiming the refund of the advance tax paid. From the submissions of assessee