← 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

Arya Offshore Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Jt CIT (OSD) Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

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

ITA 2192/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Rajesh Kumarआया" ऑफशोर स"व"सेस "ाइवेट "ल"मटेड Vs The Jt. Cit (Osd) –Central Circle- 39, Arya Offshore Services Private Room No.32, Aayakar Bhavan, Limited, Maharshi Karve Road, Godrej Coliseum, Office No.801, Mumbai C-Wing , Behind Everard Nagar, Near Priyadarshini, Sion (East), Mumbai -400 022 Pan: Aaaca 1034 D अपीलाथ" (Appellant) ""यथ" (Respondent) Appellant By "ी हष" शाह : Shri Harsh Shah Respondent By : "ी डास" सुमन र"नम Shri Darsi Suman Ratnam सुनवाईक"तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 25-02-2016 घोषणाक"तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31-05-2016

Section 143(3)

enclosing herewith the details correspondence which will show that these expenses pertained to the current year and hence have been claimed in the revised returns filed by us for AY 2009-10. In this respect it is pertinent to note that volume discount has also been offered to our customers ... Volume discount. Due to this, the income offered did not give the correct picture of the income, therefore the assessee had to file a revised return and claimed an amount of Rs.43,26,035/- in this year. Merely because credit note was issued on 23.11.2010, it does not mean that

Crescent Organics P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 10(1), Mumbai

ITA 6428/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shjoginder Singh & Rajendraआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./6428/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Crescent Organics Pvt. Ltd. Dcit-10(1) Windsor, 2Nd Floor, Cst Road Mumbai. Kalina, Santacruz (E) Vs. Mumbai-400 098. Pan:Aaacc 1690 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratham-Dr Assessee By: Shri Piyush Chhajed-Ar’S सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30.05.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 30.05.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग" अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग" अ"तग" आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Order Dt.8.7.2014 Of Cit(A)-21,Mumbai, The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company, Engaged In The Business Of Trading & Indenting Of Chemicals, Filed Its Return Of Income 27.09.2010, Declaring Total Income At Rs.17.37 Crores. A Revised Return Was Filed On 10.8.2011 Wherein The Income Was Revised At Rs.17.45 Crores .The Assessing Officer (Ao) Completed The Assessment U/S.143(3) Of The Act,Determining The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.17.62 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chhajed-AR’sFor Respondent: Dr. Darsi Suman Ratham-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

company, engaged in the business of trading and indenting of chemicals, filed its return of income 27.09.2010, declaring total income at Rs.17.37 crores. A revised return was filed on 10.8.2011 wherein the income was revised at Rs.17.45 crores .The Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment u/s.143