1993 (11) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t, as it was not filed within the time allowed. The assessee filed a revised return on March 5, 1974, showing the additional income by disclosing the fact that during the relevant period he had sold his truck. The Income-tax Officer passed an order on February 7, 1975, and that order was challenged by the assessee before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. Before the appellate authority, it was contended that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer was beyond the prescribed time. The appellate authority rejected the said contention. Aggrieved by the said order of the appellate authority, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal also rejected the said contention. Thereafter....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....deration for the purposes of computing the period of limitation under section 153(1)(c) of the Act. It may, therefore, be noted that the extended time-limit of one year under section 153(1)(c) will not be available in respect of a revised return of income purported to have been filed under section 139(5) where originally the return was filed under section 139(4)." He submitted that the aforesaid instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes is binding on the Income-tax Officer and, therefore, the assessment order passed by the Income-tax Officer on February 7, 1975, was beyond the time-limit, as it was not passed within the period of two years from the end of the assessment year in question. As against this, Mr. Shelat, lear....