TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (1) TMI 127
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tered under section 12A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It is entitled to exemption from income-tax under sections 11 and 13 of the Income-tax Act. The last date for filing the return for the assessment year 2000-01 was October 31, 2000. It is the case of the petitioner that on account of the delay on the part of the chartered accountant to finalise the accounts and file the return, the return was filed only on January 22, 2001. The petitioner also submitted Form No. 10 for accumulation along with the return. Rule 17 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, reads as follows: "17. Notice for accumulation of income by charitable or religious trust or institution or association referred to in clauses (21) and (23) of section 10.-The notice to be given t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etitioner. Firstly, he contends that under rule 17 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, the petitioner must be treated as having filed Form 10 within the time. In this context, he drew support of sub-section (4) of section 139. He contends that the petitioner has filed the return on January 22, 2001, which is well within the period stipulated under sub-section (4) of section 139. Further contention raised by the petitioner is that at any rate the petitioner must be treated as having fulfilled all the conditions in exhibit P4 circular and being a Government organisation the view taken in exhibit P5 for rejecting the application for condonation of delay cannot be sustained. 5. Per contra, Sri Jose Joseph, learned standing counsel would point out....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e completion of the assessment, whichever is earlier." 7. I have already referred to rule 17. Rule 17 is unambiguously specific in so far as it mandates that the notice shall be delivered before the expiry of the time allowed under section 139(1) for furnishing the return of income. In the first place, in my view, the words used are clear and leave no room for any ambiguity that the notice must be given within the time provided in section 139(1). The rule-making authority was aware of the provisions contained in section 139(4). The opening words of section 139(4) itself are "Any person who has not furnished a return within the time allowed to him under sub-section (1)". If it were the intention of the rule-making authority that time for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded time allowed. 9. The period fixed for filing the return for the year in question ended on October 31, 2000. The time was extended generally for all the assessees till November 30, 2000. No doubt the petitioner did not file either the return or the notice in Form No. 10 before the said date. But the petitioner did have an explanation. I cannot also overlook the fact that petitioner is essentially a Government of Kerala undertaking. Further, it is also pointed out that the petitioner has been registered since for quite sometime. The bone of contention apparently centered around a proper interpretation to be given to the word "oversight". The circular reads as follows: "In exercise of the powers conferred under section 119(2)(b) of t....