Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

This appeal preferred by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.12.2009 passed by the ld. CIT (A) for the A.Y. 2006-07.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee an individual derives income from house property, business income viz. income from derivative, income from speculation in shares, interest and salary from partnership firm and income from other sources & interest, filed return declaring total income of ` 2,21,64,580/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was inter alia, observed by the A.O. that the assessee filed re-revised return on 22.12.2008 declaring total income of ` 99,83,119/-. The reason for re-revising return is stated to be that due to an inadvertent mistake, the assessee has claimed in the revised return, the short term capital gain instead of claiming long term capital gain in ITA 1823/M/10 2 Mr. Gnanesh V.Lakhia respect of shares of demerged company namely MRIL. However, the A.O. was of the view the re-revised return is non-est as the same was filed beyond one year time from the end of the relevant assessment year. The A.O. while relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT reported in 284 ITR 323 (SC), rejected the claim of the assessee and completed the assessment at an income of ` 2,50,18,220/- vide order dated 22.12.2008 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) while agreeing with the findings of the A.O. confirmed the action of the A.O.

CIT(A) be upheld.

6. We have carefully heard the submissions of the rival parties and perused the material available on record. We find that there is no dispute that the assessee has filed re-revised return claiming the long term capital gain instead of short term capital gain claimed earlier in respect of sale of shares of MRIL which was not considered by the A.O. as the same was filed beyond one year time from the end of the relevant A.Y. therefore the A.O. treated the said re-revised return as non-est. The A.O. in the absence of valid re-revised return disallowed the claim of the assessee in view of the decision of Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra).