| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 3609 2007 SLD 3609 (2007) 290 ITR 227 (2007) 161 TAXMAN 379 |
Karnataka High Court
WRIT PETITION No. 16447 OF 2006 (T- IT), FEBRUARY 1, 2007
D.V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
WRIT PETITION No. 16447 OF 2006 (T- IT), FEBRUARY 1, 2007
D.V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR, J.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
A. Balakrishnan
v.
General Manager, Hindustan Machine Tools Ltd.
Law:
Section:
Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Return of income - General - Whether section 139 does not indicate that authorities are barred from processing return filed under Act just because it is not filed within time stipulated either under section 139(1) or 139(4) - Held, yes - Whether a return filed is bound to be processed by income-tax authorities for which purpose they are meant unless there is an embargo placed - Held, yes - Whether while it is open to an assessee to invoke provisions of section 119, not invoking provisions of section 119(2)(b) by assessee does not come in way of duty of Income-tax Department to process return filed by it belatedly - Held, yes FACTS The assessee was an employee in the first respondent organization. The assessee availed of a voluntary retirement scheme that was mooted by the employer and as a result he received an amount of Rs. 6,01,270. The employer at the time of paying said amount deducted a sum of Rs. 29,331 at source under the provisions of section 192 and an acknowledgement in Form No. 16A was also issued to the assessee evidencing the deduction of that amount from the amount paid to him and remitted the same to the credit of the Income-tax Department. The assessee filed return claiming refund of amount deducted by employer, contending that in respect of the amount that he had received in terms of the provisions of sections 10(10)(c ), 173(1) and 89, he was not liable for payment of any tax and the amount of Rs. 29,331 deducted was to be refunded. As the income-tax authorities did not respond to the return, the assessee filed an application under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005, on which respondent No. 2, the Commissioner, intimated that return of income was not valid return and could not be processed as it had been filed beyond the time-limit prescribed under section 139. The assessee filed a writ petition seeking for quashing of the endorsement passed by respondent No. 2 and for issue of a consequential mandamus to direct respondent No. 2 to refund the excess deduction. HELD A perusal of the provisions of section 139 does not indicate that the authorities are barred from processing return filed…
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