2024 (10) TMI 313 - SC - Income Tax

Non cognizance of the revised return filled beyond period of limitation - Validity of filing a revised return after the time prescribed by law - High Court proceeded to set aside the order of the Tribunal on the ground that after the revised return was barred by time, there was no provision to consider the claim made by the appellant - HELD THAT - We have carefully perused the judgment of this Court in the case of Wipro Finance Ltd 2022 (4) TMI 694 - SUPREME COURT - The issue which arose before this Court was not regarding the power of the assessing officer to consider the claim after the revised return was barred by time. This Court considered the appellate power of the Appellate Tribunal under Section 254 of the IT Act. In this case, the Court did not consider the question of the power of the assessing officer to consider a claim made after a revised return was barred by time. This Court considered the appellate powers of the Tribunal u/s 254. Moreover, this was a case where the department gave no objection for enabling the assessee to set up a fresh claim. In the case of Goetzge (India) Ltd 2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT this Court held that the assessing officer cannot entertain any claim made by the assessee otherwise than by following the provisions of the IT Act. In this case, there is no dispute that when a revised return dated 29th October 1991 was filed, it was barred by limitation in terms of section 139(5) of the IT Act. Tribunal has not exercised its power u/s 254 of the IT Act to consider the claim. Instead, the Tribunal directed the assessing officer to consider the appellant's claim. The assessing officer had no jurisdiction to consider the claim made by the assessee in the revised return filed after the time prescribed by Section 139(5) for filing a revised return had already expired.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of filing a revised return after the time prescribed by law.
2. Jurisdiction of the assessing officer to consider claims made in a revised return filed after the limitation period.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Validity of filing a revised return after the time prescribed by law
The appellant-assessee filed a return of income for the assessment year 1989-90 and subsequently filed a revised return. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal stating that the revised return filed later was barred by limitation under Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by remanding the case back to the assessing officer. The High Court set aside the Tribunal's order, emphasizing that after the revised return was barred by time, there was no provision to consider the claim made by the appellant. The Supreme Court analyzed the relevant provisions of the IT Act and previous judgments to conclude that filing a revised return after the limitation period specified in Section 139(5) is not permissible.

Issue 2: Jurisdiction of the assessing officer to consider claims made in a revised return filed after the limitation period
The appellant argued that the assessing officer could still consider the claim made regarding deduction of deferred revenue expenditure during the assessment proceedings, even if it was omitted in the original return. However, the respondent Department contended that after the revised return was barred by limitation, the assessing officer had no jurisdiction to entertain such claims. The Supreme Court referred to the provisions of the IT Act and previous judgments to establish that the assessing officer cannot entertain any claim made by the assessee outside the prescribed procedures. The Court highlighted that the Tribunal did not exercise its powers under Section 254 of the IT Act to consider the claim, and the assessing officer lacked jurisdiction to entertain claims made in a revised return filed after the limitation period.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's decision that the assessing officer had no jurisdiction to consider the appellant's claim in the revised return filed after the prescribed time limit. The judgment reaffirmed the importance of adhering to statutory timelines and procedures outlined in the Income Tax Act for filing revised returns and making claims during assessment proceedings.