9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 809X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nse to the revised return of income, since there is no requirement of assuming jurisdiction again. It is well established proposition of law that the revised return of income filed within the prescribed time limit replaces the original return of income. In present case has issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act only after filing of revised return of income. As noticed earlier, the revised return of replaces the original return of income and hence, in the facts of the present case, the notice issued by the AO has to be treated as having been issued against the revised return of income only, since the revised return of income was only surviving return of income when the AO issued the notice u/s. 143(2) - No merit in the contentions of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Member (A) 1. The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 26.3.2018 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-10, Bengaluru and it relates to assessment year 2012-13. The assessee is challenging the disallowance made by the A.O. u/s. 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ['the Act' for short] read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the I.T. Rules out of interest expenditure. Besides the above, the assessee has also raised a legal ground contesting that the A.O. should have issued notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act in respect to the revised return filed by the assessee. 2. We heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee is deriving salary income and business income. He filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 13.9.2012. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act issued by the A.O. was related to the original return of income filed by the assessee. He submitted that the original return of income shall become non-est subsequent to the filing of revised return of income. Hence, issuing of notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act is mandatory and hence the AO should have issued the same against revised return of income. 5. We heard Ld. D.R. and perused the record. For adjudicating this legal issue, it is necessary to discuss the relevant facts. We notice that the original return of income was filed by the assessee on 30.9.2012 and the revised return of income was filed on 18.10.2012, i.e., within 18 days from the date of filing of original return of income. We also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e was only surviving return of income when the AO issued the notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act. 9. We notice that the AO has completed the assessment by considering the total income declared by the assessee in the original return of income. However, in the appeal filed by the assessee before Ld CIT(A), the first appellate authority has directed the A.O. to adopt the total income declared by the assessee in the revised return of income and accordingly compute the total income. 10. Hence, we do not find any merit in the contentions of the assessee that the A.O. should have issued another notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act against the revised return of income. In any case, the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Shilpa Medica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been treated as non est and the revised return is only for the purpose of certain errors and mistakes in the original return. In such circumstances, there is no requirement of law to issue a notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act with reference to revised return. We derive support for the aforesaid conclusions from the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vinod Kumar Khatri v. DCIT [2016] 129 DTR 377 (Del). We are therefore of the view that there is no merit in grounds No. 1 2 raised by the assessee and accordingly the said grounds are dismissed. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the legal issue urged by the assessee. Accordingly, we reject the same. 11. The next issue urged on merits relate to disallowance m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ires to be examined on the basis of financial statements of the assessee. Hence, we are of the view that this issue may be restored to the file of the A.O. for examining the same afresh by duly considering the decision rendered by Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Micro Labs Ltd. (supra). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) on the issue of disallowance made out of interest expenditure under rule 8D(ii) and restore the same to the file of the A.O. for examining it afresh in accordance with decision rendered in the case of Micro Labs Ltd. (supra). 14. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 8th Dec, 202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
