Deduction claim in return accepted despite e-filing mismatch; revisional action failed where assessment had already examined the claim.

A deduction claim under Section 80P was treated as validly made where the hard copy of the return and acknowledgement showed it had been filed before the Assessing Officer, even though the electronically uploaded return did not reflect it because of a software malfunction. The Tribunal's factual finding on the upload defect was not shown to be perverse, and the Assessing Officer had in any event examined the claim in assessment. On that basis, the principle in Goetze (India) Ltd. was held inapplicable because the claim was not a fresh claim outside the return, and the Revenue failed to demonstrate any error justifying revision under Section 263.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80P, though not reflected in the electronically uploaded return, had in fact been made in the return filed before the Assessing Officer and could validly be considered so as to invalidate revision under Section 263.

Analysis: The hard copy of the return and the acknowledgement showed that the deduction claim was made before the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal's finding that the electronic upload failed to reflect the claim because of a software malfunction was not shown to be perverse. The Assessing Officer had also examined the claim in the assessment order. In these circumstances, the principle in Goetze (India) Ltd. did not apply, because the claim was not being introduced for the first time otherwise than in the return. The Revenue also failed to show any error in the assessment order warranting exercise of revisional power under Section 263.

Conclusion: The question was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee; the revisional order was not sustainable and the appeal failed.

---