HON’BLE SUPREME COURT · SOURCE-REVIEWED NOTE
Orissa Rural Housing Development Corporation Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors.
Civil Appeal Nos. 7249–7250 of 2015
2026 INSC 1116 ·
Income-tax Act, 1961: sections 139(5), 143(2), 234B, 254 and 264
Sources & disclosures includedDownload original judgment / order
2-judge bench · Prashant Kumar Mishra J. · Shree Chandrashekhar J.
Assessment years: 2006–07
01 · Facts of the case
For AY 2006–07 the company sought to revise its return by petition and later pursued section 264 revision. The Commissioner refused the fresh claim without a revised return; the later first appeal was held not maintainable after revision had been invoked. The High Court dismissed the writ challenge, leading to these appeals.
02 · Discussion by the Hon’ble Court
Following Om Siddhakala Associates, the Court rejected use of revision to obtain the fresh claim where a revised return had not been filed within time. It distinguished the cited authorities and the Tribunal’s section 254 powers. It explained that allowing fresh claims on new facts not before the AO would make assessment endless, while paragraph 13 permits a new point of law on the existing factual record.
03 · Judicial decision
The Court found no substance in the appeals and dismissed them. Pending applications stood disposed of.
04 · Outcome / in whose favour
Revenue. The assessee obtained no interference with the challenged orders. The decision addresses the route and factual foundation for the fresh claim; it does not grant or quantify a deduction.
05 · AKHB REVIEW POINT
Identify whether the proposed ground is a new legal point on facts already before the AO or a fresh claim requiring new foundational facts. Check revised-return timing and the distinct powers of the AO, revisional authority and Tribunal; retain the express paragraph 13 qualification.
Source & verification
Download original judgment / order · Open cited source rendition
The complete eight-page signed reportable order was read, including all reproduced authorities and the operative result/date. These exact bytes were obtained from the identified public mirror. A separate official one-page record of proceedings corroborates the date, dockets, bench and dismissal, and is not substituted for the eight-page reasoned order.
Statutory scope
Income-tax proceedings under the identified statutory setting. This note does not establish equivalence under the Income-tax Act, 2025, or comprehensive later-treatment/current-law clearance.
Later treatment
Source checked 2026-10-22. Subsequent treatment and current-law applicability have not been comprehensively checked.
Page references identify the supplied PDF; paragraph references identify the judgment unless stated otherwise.
Identified source links
- Separate official one-page record of proceedings dated 8 October 2026
This is the official proceedings order referring to the signed reportable order, not the complete eight-page reasoned order.
SHA-256: bf91f0354199c732f88484e2a2d58a3062f1609635beb77a315cd778620e44c4
AI disclosure & professional disclaimer
This AKHB research note was prepared with AI assistance from an identified primary report. Independent human review is not represented.
General legal and tax research only; not legal or tax advice. Verify the complete judgment, applicable statutory version and subsequent treatment before reliance. The AKHB REVIEW POINT is editorial analysis, not the Court’s holding. No current-law clearance is claimed.