1987 (8) TMI 26 - HC - Income Tax

High Court rules assessment barred by limitation, extended time-limit inapplicable to revised return.

The High Court ruled against the Revenue, finding that the assessment completed on February 13, 1973, was barred by limitation. The court held that the ... Assessment, Limitation Issues:- Whether the assessment completed by the Income-tax Officer on February 13, 1973, was barred by limitation.Analysis:The case involved a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act to decide if the assessment completed by the Income-tax Officer was time-barred. The relevant assessment year was 1967-68, and the assessee failed to file the return within the prescribed period. The assessee filed for extension twice, but no order was passed by the Income-tax Officer. The return was eventually filed on November 29, 1967, without any further request for extension. Subsequently, revised returns were filed, and the final assessment was completed on February 13, 1973. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Tribunal both held that the assessment was time-barred, which led to the reference by the Revenue.The High Court analyzed the facts and found that the return filed on November 29, 1967, was not within the extended time by the Income-tax Officer. The court considered if the provision in clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 153 of the Act could apply in this case. Referring to previous decisions, the court held that a return filed under sub-section (4) of section 139 is not the same as a return under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 139. Relying on earlier Division Bench decisions, the court concluded that the extended time-limit under section 153(1)(c) for completing the assessment is not available for a revised return filed under section 139(4). Despite contrary views from the Calcutta High Court, the High Court upheld its previous decisions, leading to the judgment against the Revenue.In conclusion, the High Court answered the reference against the Revenue, stating that the assessment completed on February 13, 1973, was indeed barred by limitation. The court expressed gratitude to the amicus curiae for their assistance and ruled that no costs were to be awarded in this matter.