Rule 12 — the law in short
What the courts have decided on section Rule 12, in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
Luxury Goods Retail Pvt Ltd v DCIT
ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
You filed a loss return on paper within the due date because the portal would not let you in. Has the carry-forward gone?
No. The Tribunal held that a return filed manually within the due date under s.139(1) is a valid return, and that filing it on paper rather than electronically makes it at best a defective return and not an invalid one. Section 292B protects a return that substantially complies with the intent of the statute, and the carry-forward of the loss could not be refused on that ground.
-
JCIT v Tata Cummins Ltd
ITATHelps taxpayerNo later treatment found
The officer's order under s.139(9) says your return is invalid and that you are not entitled to carry forward the loss. Can he decide that in a s.139(9) order?
No. The Tribunal held that an order under s.139(9) can be made only to determine whether there was a defect in the return and whether it was rectified. An officer who goes on to rule on entitlement to carry forward the loss has made an assessment order, with the consequence that it is appealable. On the facts the Tribunal also held that the acknowledgement sheet is not part of the return prescribed under Rule 12, and that a signature defect, once removed, relates back to the date the return was originally filed.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.
