Court rules assessment order for 1981-82 not time-barred. Period between draft order and directions excluded.

The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, determining that the assessment order for the assessment year 1981-82 was not barred by limitation. The court found that the period between the draft assessment order and the receipt of directions should be excluded in calculating the limitation period, as per relevant provisions. Consequently, the reference made under section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was deemed valid, and the decision favored the Revenue over the assessee.

---

---

Issues:
1. Interpretation of section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding the validity and limitation of a reference made.
2. Determination of whether the assessment order was barred by limitation for the assessment year 1981-82.

Analysis:
1. The court was tasked with interpreting the validity and limitation of a reference made under section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal had referred a question of law regarding the validity of the reference made under section 144B for the assessment year 1981-82. The court deliberated on whether the Tribunal was correct in holding the reference as bad in law and barred by limitation. The court examined the timeline of events related to the assessment and the provisions of the Act to reach a conclusion.

2. For the assessment year 1981-82, the assessee filed the return on May 23, 1981, and the assessment was completed on August 8, 1984, under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the assessment order was beyond the stipulated period of two years from the end of the financial year, which was March 31, 1984, as per section 153 of the Act. However, the Revenue argued that as per Explanation 1, clause (iv) below section 153, a certain period was to be excluded in determining the limitation period. The draft assessment order was prepared on March 10, 1984, and permission was received on August 3, 1984. By excluding this period, the assessment was deemed to be within the time limit prescribed by the Act.

3. The court referred to a previous judgment in CIT v. Gheru Lal Bal Chand [1998]233 ITR 82 (P&H) where a similar issue was adjudicated. It was held that the period between the date of the draft assessment order and the receipt of directions should be excluded in calculating the limitation period. Applying this interpretation to the present case, the court concluded that the assessment was made within the prescribed time limit. Consequently, the court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee.

4. Based on the above analysis and interpretation of relevant provisions, the court answered the question in favor of the Revenue, affirming that the assessment was not barred by limitation. The reference made under section 144B was deemed valid, and the decision was made in favor of the Revenue.

5. The court disposed of the reference accordingly, providing a clear resolution to the issue at hand regarding the validity and limitation of the reference made under section 144B for the assessment year 1981-82.

---