Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: revised return when valid in Anagha Kishor Chaudhari, Mumbai vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) , ... on 2 May, 2023Matching Fragments
6. Now the assessee claims that as per the requirements of Section 115BAC, the return ought to have been filed on or before extended period i.e., 15.03.2022, being the prescribed time limit u/s. 139(1) of the Act and since the revised return filed much later on 31.03.2022 was in violation of conditions prescribed u/s. 115BAC, the same ought to have been rejected by CPC. Ld.CIT(A) observed that it is evident that assessee was changing his claim and options for taxation in a casual and capricious manner by filing revised return with untenable option u/s.115BAC beyond the prescribed time limit which was rightly denied by CPC. Since it was otherwise a validly filed revised return filed u/s.139(5), it was processed accordingly u/s. 143(1) of the Act under normal provisions, as was done in the case of original return. When the income had been shown on a higher side in the revised return and no claim for deduction under Chapter VI-A was also made by the assessee ITA NO. 3200/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2021-22) Anagha Kishor Chaudhari in the revised return, there is no scope or provisions u/s. 143(1) for CPC to travel beyond the revised return of income filed.
7. Ld.CIT(A) observed that now the assessee himself admits that the revised return filed wherein the option for taxation u/s. 115BAC was exercised for the first time, was filed beyond the prescribed time limit of 15.03.2022. However, it is also claimed that since the revised return filed was not in compliance with the requirements of Section 115BAC, it should have been ignored in entirety by CPC.
8. Ld.CIT(A) observed that this claim of the assessee is not tenable under the provisions of section 139(5) or u/s. 143(1) of the Act. The Processing u/s.143(1) is not an assessment proceeding where the correctness or otherwise of the claim can be subjected to detailed scrutiny and or verification so as to confer deductions not claimed by the assessee himself. It is an automated process subject to the permissible adjustments as provided for under the Act in section 143(1) and nothing more can be asked of it. He further observed that once a revised return is validly filed u/s. 139(5), the original return filed earlier ceases to exist. The only valid return is the revised return and the provisions of Act shall apply to its contents independent of the original return.
3. The Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC failed to appreciate that the revised return seeking assessment under new scheme was not valid in view of section 115BAC(5)
4. The Assessing Officer who made the assessment u/s 143(1) as well as the Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC who refused to grant relief in appeal, have failed to appreciate that such major adjustment cannot be done u/s 143(1), the scope of which is very limited.
5. The Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC erred in not granting hearing to the assessee.
13. We observe that CPC is aware of the fact that assessee has filed its original return of income declaring the same gross total income and paid the due taxes as per the old scheme of taxation and further, while ITA NO. 3200/MUM/2022 (A.Y: 2021-22) Anagha Kishor Chaudhari filing revised return of income assessee has not followed the due process of law by first intimating the Assessing Officer with the option of selecting the new scheme of taxation u/s. 115BAC as per Rule 21AG. It is also fact on record that assessee has validated the taxation option while filing the revised return of income and CPC while processing the same has computed the taxable income by rejecting the taxation option selected by the assessee. It is not the case that CPC is not aware of the fact that assessee has not filed the original return of income it is evident that CPC is aware of the fact CPC has already released the refund as per original return of income. Now, assessee, though revised the same it is the duty of the CPC to ask the assessee for the clarification and in the clarification if the assessee has intend to further revise the return of income in order to claim the benefit under Chapter - VI-A considering the fact that the option selected by the assessee has to be rejected due to non-following of the respective rules.