Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
A revised return validly filed on discovery of bona fide omissions under section 139(5) supplants the original return for all assessment purposes, so the original computation cannot be treated as surviving separately for depreciation. The Court held that the revised return here was not a mere change in depreciation mode but also corrected omitted claims, and there was no mala fide intent. It further held that Rule 5(1A) is directory, but the option to switch from SLM to WDV cannot extend the statutory due date under section 139(1). Since the revised return replaced the original and the depreciation option was otherwise within the year concerned, the assessee was allowed to adopt WDV and the revenue's challenge failed.
A revised return validly filed on discovery of bona fide omissions under section 139(5) supplants the original return for all assessment purposes, so the original computation cannot be treated as surviving separately for depreciation. The Court held that the revised return here was not a mere change in depreciation mode but also corrected omitted claims, and there was no mala fide intent. It further held that Rule 5(1A) is directory, but the option to switch from SLM to WDV cannot extend the statutory due date under section 139(1). Since the revised return replaced the original and the depreciation option was otherwise within the year concerned, the assessee was allowed to adopt WDV and the revenue's challenge failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
