Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2017 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (3) TMI 1391 - HC - Income Tax


Issues:
- Claim of deduction under Chapter VIA of the Income Tax Act not made in the original return of income
- Validity of revision of assessment order under Section 263 of the Act
- Consideration of merits of claim for deduction under Section 80P of the Act by Assessing Officer
- Functionality of software for electronically uploaded return of income

Analysis:
1. Claim of deduction under Chapter VIA not made in original return:
The respondent assessee, a Cooperative Credit Society, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2007-08 both in hard copy and online. The Assessing Officer initially accepted the return as Nil after allowing exemption under Section 80P of the Act. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax revised the assessment order under Section 263, setting it aside for fresh consideration due to the deduction granted even though not claimed by the respondent. The Tribunal found that the deduction under Chapter VIA was indeed claimed by the respondent, and a software error caused it not to reflect in the electronically uploaded return. The Tribunal held that the benefit of deduction under Section 80P was claimed in the return, and the Assessing Officer did consider the merits of the claim.

2. Validity of revision of assessment order under Section 263:
The Commissioner revised the assessment order due to the deduction granted without being claimed and lack of proper enquiries by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal found that the hard copy of the return filed with the Assessing Officer did show the claim for deduction under Section 80P. The malfunctioning of the software for the electronically uploaded return was acknowledged, and it was evident that the income declared before deduction was substantial. The Tribunal concluded that the revisionary powers were rightly exercised as the claim was indeed made by the respondent.

3. Consideration of merits of claim for deduction under Section 80P:
The Revenue contended that the Assessing Officer did not consider the claim for deduction under Section 80P, but the Tribunal found otherwise. It noted that the Assessing Officer had indeed considered the claim, and there was no demonstration of any error in the consideration. The Tribunal held that the question raised did not give rise to any substantial question of law, as the claim was properly considered by the Assessing Officer.

4. Functionality of software for electronically uploaded return:
The malfunctioning of the software caused the deduction under Section 80P not to reflect in the electronically uploaded return, leading to the Revenue's grievance. However, the Tribunal found that the hard copy of the return clearly indicated the claim for deduction. The malfunctioning of the software was not disputed, and the Tribunal's finding on this matter was considered valid. The Apex Court decision cited by the Revenue was deemed inapplicable due to the clear claim made by the respondent in the hard copy of the return.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Tribunal's decision that the claim for deduction under Section 80P was validly made by the respondent assessee, and the revision of the assessment order under Section 263 was justified.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates