2004 (8) TMI 737 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
Validity of filing a revised return under section 139(5) after filing the original return under section 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:

The case involved a reference from the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the validity of revising a return filed under section 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by filing another return under section 139(5). The applicant initially filed a return of income under section 139(4) for the assessment year 1979-80, and later filed a revised return claiming a deduction that was not adequately claimed in the original return. The Income-tax Officer rejected the revised return, stating that the original return was not filed under section 139(1) or (2) and therefore could not be revised under section 139(5). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the revision, but the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal overturned this decision.

The High Court referred to the decision of the Apex Court in Kumar Jagdish Chandra Sinha v. CIT [1996] 220 ITR 671, where it was held that a revised return cannot be filed under section 139(5) if the original return was filed under section 139(4). The High Court, following the Apex Court's decision, concluded that the revised return filed by the assessee was invalid in law and could not be treated as a valid revised return under section 139(5) of the Act. Therefore, the High Court answered the question in favor of the revenue and against the assessee, upholding the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. No costs were awarded in this case.

In summary, the judgment clarified that a revised return cannot be filed under section 139(5) of the Income-tax Act if the original return was filed under section 139(4). The decision was based on the precedent set by the Apex Court in a similar case, emphasizing the procedural requirements for revising income tax returns under different sections of the Act.