No Claim of Capital Loss when revised Income Tax Return filed u/s 139(5) became non-est: ITAT [Read Order]

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Pune Bench held that there is no claim of capital loss when revised return filed under Section 139(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 became non-est.

The adjudication for the impugned assessment year shall rest on answering the question of whether income reported by filing belated return filed can be varies by filing revised return u/s 139(5) of the income tax Act. The assessee, Vijay Channabasav Suttatti is an individual deriving income from salaries, house property, interest and capital gain etc., has for AY 2012-13 e-filed his Income Tax Return u/s 139(4) on 28/02/2014 declaring total taxable income of Rs1,28,93,465 which subsequent e-filing revised to Rs 1,06,517 for the reason of change in capital gain computation.

Considering the factual matrix and evidential material laid in the course of regular assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO in the light of then applicable provisions, turned off the revised return as non-est in the eye of law and finalised the assessment on the strength and basis of original return filed with an addition of Rs 5,235/- arising out of differential amount of interest earned by the assessee for impugned assessment year.

The Bench consisting of S S Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member and G D Padmahshali, Accountant member held that “The provisions relating to furnishing of a revised return is provided u/s 139(5), which entitles an assessee to furnish a revised return if he discovers any omission or any wrong statement in the original return filed, however for the impugned assessment year, this right or entitlement of revision was given to an assessee who has filed original return either u/s 139(1) oru/s 142(1), this by necessary implication means that, such a right was denied and not at all available to the assessee who has filed the return u/s 139(4), this view has been historically held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in much celebrated case of “Kumar Jagdish Chandra Sinha Vs CIT”.”

“Thus, in the case before us, the appellant filed his original return otherwise than u/s 139(1) or 142(1), the revised return filed u/s 139(5) of the Act became non-est in the eyes of law, consequently the claim of capital loss made by the appellant in his revised return” the Tribunal said.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates