Revised return supersedes original return; no fresh scrutiny notice is needed, while section 14A interest disallowance needs fund verification.

A revised return filed within the prescribed time supersedes the original return, and a notice under section 143(2) issued after the revised return does not require repetition merely because the return was revised. The jurisdictional objection on fresh notice was therefore rejected. On the interest disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D(2)(ii), the applicability of the disallowance depends on verification of the assessee's own funds and financial statements. Because that factual inquiry had not been completed at the proper stage, the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication on availability of interest-free funds.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a fresh notice under section 143(2) was required after filing of the revised return. (ii) Whether the interest disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D(2)(ii) required deletion or fresh examination on the basis of availability of own funds.

Issue (i): Whether a fresh notice under section 143(2) was required after filing of the revised return.

Analysis: The revised return was filed within the prescribed time and replaced the original return. The notice under section 143(2) was issued after the revised return had already been filed. In those circumstances, the notice was treated as issued in relation to the surviving revised return. The legal position applied was that once jurisdiction to scrutinize the return is validly assumed, there is no requirement to issue another notice merely because a revised return is subsequently filed.

Conclusion: The contention that a fresh notice under section 143(2) was mandatory was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether the interest disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D(2)(ii) required deletion or fresh examination on the basis of availability of own funds.

Analysis: The claim was that own funds exceeded the investment in the partnership firm and therefore no interest disallowance was warranted under section 14A. The applicability of the principle depended on the financial statements and factual verification of the source of investments. Since that factual exercise had not been undertaken at the appropriate level, the matter required reconsideration by the assessing authority in the light of the governing precedent on availability of interest-free funds.

Conclusion: The interest disallowance issue was set aside and restored for fresh adjudication.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only in part, with the jurisdictional objection rejected and the dispute on interest disallowance remitted for fresh examination.

Ratio Decidendi: A revised return filed within time supersedes the original return, and where scrutiny proceedings are already validly set in motion, no fresh notice under section 143(2) is required merely because of the revised return; however, a disallowance under section 14A based on interest expenditure must be tested against the assessee's financial position, including the sufficiency of own funds.

---