Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that the claim, which was initially omitted in the original return, was made validly by filing a revised return before the completion of the assessment. The Counsel for the assessee argued that even if the claim had been made directly during the assessment proceedings, it should have been considered. Numerous judicial decisions support the assessee's contention that claims made before the completion of the assessment, even if they were not included in the original return, are allowable. The assessee also highlighted that the earlier AO had accepted the claim made in the revised return, and had only made a statistical error by considering the income as per the original return instead of the revised one. This error was rectified promptly by the earlier AO. The new AO, however, complicated the matter by focusing on the technicality of the Vipul Purshottamdas Thakkar vs. DCIT Asst.Year -2012-13

- 6- infirmity in the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) so as to call for any interference.

7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record.

8. On going through the facts of the case, we observe that it is an admitted fact that the assessee had filed belated return in response to notice under Section 153A of the Act. Therefore, the return filed under section 153A of the Act has replaced the original return of income filed under section 139(1) of the Act. The law, as it stood at the relevant time provided that a belated return, though valid, could not be revised in terms of section 139(5) of the Act. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on the case of Janak K. Kansara v. DCIT 116 TTJ 415 (Ahmedabad - ITAT), wherein it was held that in a block return which is filed beyond time-limit of 45 days prescribed in notice but before completion of assessment is a valid return and same cannot be ignored by Assessing Officer. However, the issue before us is not whether the returned filed beyond the time period of 45 days is a valid return or not, but the issue for consideration is whether the said belated return, even though valid, could be revised under section 139(5) of the Act. In the instant facts, we observe that the assessee had revised original return of income under section 139(1) of the Act on 28.09.2012, in which the assessee had not claimed deduction under section 54B of the Act. Thereafter, in consequence to search action, the assessee filed belated return of income under section 153A of the Act on 10.10.2013, declaring total income of Rs. 1,44,03,930/-, in which again the assessee had not claimed deduction under section 54B of the Vipul Purshottamdas Thakkar vs. DCIT Asst.Year -2012-13

- 7- Act. Thereafter, the assessee filed revised return of income on 30.03.2014 in which exemption under section 54B of the Act was claimed for the first time. The law, as it stood at the relevant time clearly provided that the return of income if filed belatedly could not be revised under section 139(5) of the Act. Therefore, the issue for consideration before us is not whether the return of income filed by the assessee under section 153A of the Act, on 10.10.2013 is a valid return or not, since, even if, it is accepted the same to be a valid return of income, the assessee had not claimed exemption under section 54B of the Act in the said return. The issue for consideration before us is whether the revised return of income filed by the assessee on 30.03.2014, revising the belated return dated 10.10.2013 can be said to be a valid return of income under section 139(5) of the Act. We are of the considered view that since the belated return, (even if deemed to be valid) cannot be revised under section 139(5) of the Act then the assessee also cannot claim benefit of section 54B of the Act, in the said, revised return of income which is not a valid return of income in the eyes of law. It would be useful to reproduce the relevant extracts of the 154 order dated 10.11.2026 for ready reference:

"3. Without prejudice, the return filed u/s 153A was not filed within due time, hence it was a belated return. The belated return can not be revised. Hence, assessee's filing of online revised return is not a valid return. Therefore, in view of the above, there was no mistake apparent from the record in the assessment order passed u/s 153A r.w.s,i43(3) on 17.03.2015, which the rectification order passed u/s 154 dated 06.05.2016 sought to rectify."