Case Law Details
Ajay Kumar Gupta (HUF) Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)
Conclusion: Since assessee was an HUF and HUF itself could not become a working partner in the partnership firm, therefore, the due date of filing of the return applicable to assessee was 31st July of the relevant assessment year and belated return filed by assessee could not be revised.
Held: In the present case, assessee sought to revise belated return filed by it on the ground that it was ‘working partner’ in a firm whose accounts were required to be audited and due date under section 139(1) was 30 the September of the assessment year.It was held assessee was an HUF and HUF itself could not become a working partner in the partnership firm. The due date of filing of return of income will be 31stJuly of the relevant assessment year as per section 139 and the due date for filing of return for working partner has been mentioned in Section 139(1) Explanation 2(iii). The benefit of extended date by the CBDT would not help assessee, accordingly, belated return filed by assessee could not be revised.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-16, New Delhi dated 27.07.2015 for the assessment year 2010-11 on the following grounds :
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.