Kindly give your opinion in the following scenario -
Suppose a person X files his return against which he receives a notice of defective return bcz the credits in 26 AS was more than the income shown by him
Now, instead of filling the return u/s 139(9), he revise the return u/s 139(5) correcting the above discrepancy. After that, he receives another notice u/s 143(1) bcz he has claimed deduction u/s 80D more than the allowed limit.
Further, the time period for replying to notice of 143(1) has elapsed.
So now, what should be done. Whether to again revise the return u/s 139(5) or reply to the initial notice u/s 139(9).
Reply To Notice
Replies (1)
So now if you agree that 80D deduction you have taken is more than allowed limit then response online on the portal as ""Agree "" or if not then tick mark ""disagree"" and give brief narration.
Old notice u/s 139(9) is no more existing.
Submit response after examining 80D provisions.
Old notice u/s 139(9) is no more existing.
Submit response after examining 80D provisions.
Recent Topics :
- Bill-to-ship-to material at client site, project c
- Export previously now to be considered domestic sa
- Pan surrender via online
- EPFO Portal Issue – Unable to Save Employee
- Plant & Machinary
- ITC reversal after supplier amended the recipient
- GIFTS TO USEFUL CONTACTS ON FESTIVALS INCOME TAX
- INTEREST ON REFUND OF TDS
- Input tax claim related
- User not found in MCA portal
Related Topics :
CAclubindia
