AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This assessee's appeal for assessment year 2021-22, arises against the ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Chandigarh's, DIN No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1088115670 (1) dated 30.03.2026 involving proceedings under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
The assessee at the outset, invites the tribunal's attention to the learned ADDL/JCIT(A)'s appellate discussion rejecting his lower appeal; reading as under:-
5.2The appellant now claims that the disclosure of Rs.10,30,026/- as presumptive income u/s 44DA of the Act was an inadvertent mistake made by the appellant’s Chartered Accountant in audit report form 3CB point no. 23 of Schedule BP without any valid reasons. I have gone through the return filed by the appellant.
5.3For correcting any omission or wrong statement in the return filed, the law provides for the revision of return u/s 139(5) of the IT Act. The provisions of Section 139(5) are reproduced as under for easy reference.
“[5] If any person, having furnished a return under sub-section [1] or sub-section [4], discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time 48[before three months prior to the end] of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier.”
5.4It is clear from the above provision that, if the Taxpayer finds any omission or wrong statement in the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act, the option available to him is to file a revised return and correct the mistake committed in the original return. Under Section 143(1), the powers of the Assessing Officer are limited to the extent of checking the arithmetical accuracy of computation of tax and making certain adjustments as provided in clause (a) of Section 143(1) of the Act. He cannot reduce the income admitted in the return of income by the taxpayer. That can be done only by thetaxpayer by revising his own return. This view is supported by the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India Limited) reported in (2006) 157 Taxmann 01(SC), wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the Assessing Officer does not have the power to entertain a claim for deduction otherwise than by filing a revised return. It upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer that there was no provision under the IT Act to make amendment to the return of income, otherwise than by filing a revised return.
5.5Such being the case, the appellant cannot now request for removing the income admitted by him in the return of income filed. The remedy available for him is to file a revised return u/s 139(5) of the Act. Hence, the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant on this issue are dismissed
Suffice to say, it is came on record that learned lower appellate authority has placed reliance on Goetze (India) Limited reported in (2006) 157 Taxmann 01(SC) while holding that only option with the assessee is to file a revised return u/s 139(5) of the Act before the Assessing Officer. This tribunal hereby is of the considered view that their lordships have made it clear in para-4 thereof that such a precondition of filing of a revised return is only for raising a new claim before the Assessing Officer and the jurisdiction of various appellate authorities under the provisions of the Act in entertaining the same has nowhere been impugned upon. I accordingly deem it appropriate to accept the assessee’s argument herein in principal to this limited extent and direct the learned CIT(A) to decide the appeal of the assessee afresh on merits as per law in very terms.
All other legal as well as factual issues between the parties are kept open at this state.
In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.