Law:

Section:

Section 147(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Reassessment - Information - Assesses filed original return showing an income of Rs. 2,092 before ITO, M, who was assessing the assessee, on 29-11-1962 - Revised return showing an income of Rs. 12,797 was filed before ITO, E Ward, on 2-8-1963 and received by ITO, M, on 3-12-1963 - Original assessment was completed by ITO, M, on 27-11-1963 - Whether ITO, M, could reopen assessment on basis of revised return - Held, on facts, yes Facts For the assessment year 1962-63, the assessee filed a return on 29-11-1962, showing an income of Rs. 2,092 (i.e., loss from business and profession to the extent of Rs. 4,422.89 and profit from another source to the extent of Rs. 6,519.15) as its profit. According to the assessee, a mistake had occurred in the preparation of the return, inasmuch as the profit of Rs. 10,718.46 arising from construction works had been left out from the return. But it appeared that along with the original return, a copy of the balance sheet and profit and loss account, was filed by the assessee. In the profit and loss account, the profit from construction work was indicated. The ITO, namely, M, who was assessing the assessee, made the assessment on 27-11-1963. On 2-8-1963, the assessee filed a revised return before the ITO, E Ward, who was different from the ITO assessing the assessee, showing an income of Rs. 12,796 (i.e., profits from business and profession was Rs. 7,461.42 and profits from other sources was Rs. 5,336.23). The said revised return was received by the ITO, assessing the assessee, on 3-12-1963. The ITO, M, reopened the assessee's assessment on the ground that the revised return was not before her when the assessment order was originally made but came to her possession later on when it was forwarded to her on 3-12-1963. On receipt of the notice, the assessee wrote challenging the ITO's jurisdiction and thereafter not being satisfied moved an application under article 226 of the Constitution and obtained a rule nisi which was ultimately discharged by order dated 30-4-1970. On appeal, the Division Bench upheld the Single Judge's order. On appeal: Held It is true that even after the expiry of…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492