If any person having furnished his return within the date specified u/s 139(1), discovers any omission or wrong statement therein, then he may furnish a revised return at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier.
A return can be revised any number of times. However, a belated return cannot be revised.
Related Cases:
- S. 4, 139(5), 143 & 254(1) of IT Act, 1961—Return of income—There is no provision under the IT Act to make an amendment in the return of income by modifying an application at the assessment stage without revising the return—Jay Bharat Co-op. HSG Society Ltd. vs. ITO (2009) 125 TTJ 552 (ITAT-Mum)
- S. 139(5), 14A(1), 140A(3), 220, 225 & 226(3) of IT Act, 1961—Recovery—The consideration of the revised return is part of a composite exercise of an assessment. Sub-section (1) of S. 140A fixes the date of furnishing of the return as the outer limit of time for making payment of tax. If the payment under S. 140A(i) is not made on or before the date of furnishing of the return, the assessee is considered to be in default, by a deeming fiction created under sub-section (3). The liability to pay income-tax chargeable u/s 4(1) does not depend on the assessment being made. Hence, non-payment of self-assessment tax u/s 140A(1) along with the return made by the assessee, an assessee in default but once the revised return is filed attachment and garnishee order cannot be continued without rejecting the revised return as per law—Pyramid Saimira Theatre Ltd. vs. CIT (2009) 226 CTR 62 (Mad)
- S. 139(5) & 143(1B) of IT Act, 1961—Assessment—On a plain reading of S. 143(1B), the provision mandates that if after the issuance of intimation, a revised return is furnished by an assessee under sub-section (5) of S. 139, it is incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to process the revised return and amend the intimation issued u/s 143(1)(a) on the basis of the revised return. An intimation cannot be equated with an assessment framed u/s 143(3) and the Assessing Officer cannot refuse to process the revised return and modify the return filed within prescribed period and modify the intimation in accordance with S. 143(1B) of the Act—CIT vs. Himgiri Foods Ltd. (2010) 231 CTR 470 (Guj)
- S. 139(5), 143(1), 148 & 263 of IT Act, 1961—Revision—If any person having furnished a return under sub-section (1) or in pursuance of a notice issued under sub-section (1) of S. 142, discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier. An intimation u/s 143(1) being not an assessment, the assessee is entitled to revise the return within a period of one year specified in S. 139(5) of the Act—Sesa Industries Ltd. vs. CIT (2010) 132 TTJ 730 (ITAT-Panaji)
- S. 72A & 139 (5) of IT Act, 1961—Return—The petitioner filed his revised return on 12th Jan., 2007 and 27th Dec., 2007 after the assessment was completed on 28th Dec., 2006. Once the scheme of amalgamation has been sanctioned with effect from particular date, it is binding on every one including the statutory authorities. The only course open to the revenue would be to act as the scheme sanctioned effective from 1st Jan., 2004 which means that the tax authorities are bound to take note of the state of affairs of the applicant as on 1st Jan., 2004 and a return reflecting the same cannot be ignored on the strength of S. 139(5) of the Act—Pentamedia Graphics Ltd. vs. ITO (2010) 236 CTR 204 (Mad)
- S. 37(1), 40A(9), 139(5), 251(1)(a) & 254 (1) of IT Act, 1961—Appeal (Tribunal)—The power of the first appellate authority being co-terminus with that of the assessing authority, it can in such circumstances admit the claim not raised earlier, and adjudicate the same after hearing the Assessing Officer, and which may also include calling for remand report from him where consideration necessary or in other words where a claim would not have been made when the return was filed or during assessment or where the ground became available only subsequently on account of change in law or circumstances, such claim can be raised before the appellate authority for the first time—Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural Rural Development Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT (2011) 139 TTJ 585 (ITAT-Coch.)
- S. 80, 139(1), 139(3) & 139(5) of IT Act, 1961—Loss—As per the provisions of Sub-section (5) of S. 139, in both the situations where the assessee has filed the return of positive income as well as return of loss at the first instance as per the time-limit prescribed and subsequently, files the revised return then the revised return is treated as valid return. Since the assessee has filed its original return declaring the positive income and, therefore, revised return is valid return also and the assessee is entitled to carry forward of long-term capital loss—Ramesh Shah vs. ACIT (2012) 143 TTJ 166 (ITAT-Mum)
Reference:
As Per 139(5), of the Income Tax Act, 1961-
Return of income
139(5). If any person, having furnished a return under sub-section (1), or in pursuance of a notice issued under sub-section (1) of S. 142, discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier.
Provided that where the return relates to the previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1988, or any earlier assessment year, the reference to one year aforesaid shall be construed as a reference to two years from the end of the relevant assessment year.