TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court overturns Tribunal order, remands case for fresh assessment in line with law. Clarification on tax obligations.</h1> <h3>Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner of Income-tax And Another.</h3> Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner of Income-tax And Another. - [2005] 276 ITR 49, 195 CTR 39, 144 TAXMANN 220 Issues:1. Obligation of Assessing Officer to adjust demand based on revised return2. Validity of second revised return and carry forward of lossesAnalysis:1. Obligation of Assessing Officer to adjust demand based on revised return:The case involved the question of whether the Assessing Officer is obliged to adjust the demand made under section 143(1)(a) based on earlier returns when a second revised return is filed within the specified period. The Tribunal had decided the case without considering this legal position. The High Court examined the timeline of return filings and intimation under section 143(1)(a). It was noted that the second revised return was filed within the relevant assessment year, making it a valid return. The Court held that the assessment should be made under section 143(1B) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and not under section 143(3) due to the absence of a notice under sub-section (2) of section 143.2. Validity of second revised return and carry forward of losses:The Court addressed the issue of whether the second revised return, filed after the intimation under section 143(1)(a), was valid. It was established that the return was filed within the assessment year and before the completion of assessment, meeting the requirements of section 139(5). The Court emphasized that the unabsorbed depreciation could be carried forward to the succeeding previous year as per section 32(2). The Tribunal's decision to remand the case based on the enhanced figure in the revised return was deemed incorrect. The Court directed the Assessing Officer to assess the case afresh based on the second revised return, within three months from the date of the order.In conclusion, the High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Tribunal's order and remanding the case for fresh assessment in accordance with the law. The judgment clarified the legal obligations regarding revised returns, adjustment of demands, and carry forward of losses, providing a detailed analysis of the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
