| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 3418 2006 SLD 3418 (2006) 281 ITR 194 |
Allahabad High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 26 OF 1997 APRIL 15, 2005
R.K. AGRAWAL AND RAJES KUMAR, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
IT REFERENCE No. 26 OF 1997 APRIL 15, 2005
R.K. AGRAWAL AND RAJES KUMAR, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Commissioner of IncomE tax, Meerut *
v.
Rohit Organics P. Ltd.
Law:
Section:
Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Return of income - General - Assessment year 1988-89 - Whether a duty is cast on Assessing Officer to intimate to assessee whether its request for extension of time for furnishing of return had been granted or refused - Held, yes - Whether where application for extension of time for filing return had not been rejected and nothing had been communicated in that regard, assessee could not be held responsible for inaction on part of Assessing Officer and that application would be deemed to have been allowed - Held, yes CASES REFERRED TO Harmanjit Trust v. CIT [1984] 148 ITR 214/ 17 Taxman 372 (Punj. & Har.) [Para 2], CIT v. Janata Film Exchange (P.) Ltd. [1993]202 ITR 532 (Cal.) [Para 7], Lachman Chaturbhuj Java v. R.G. Nitsure [1981] 132 ITR 631/ 6 Taxman 198 (Bom.) [Para 8], CIT v.Ajanta Electricals [1995] 215 ITR 114/ 81 Taxman 166 (SC) [Para 9] and Jan Daood & Co. v. ITO [1978] 113 ITR 772 (All.) [Para 10]. V. Gulati for the Respondent. ORDER 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') for opinion to this Court : "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned ITA was legally correct in directing the Assessing Officer to allow carry forward of business loss in assessment year 1988-89 in contravention of provisions of sections 80 and 139(3) in this regard." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as 'assessee'), is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act. Assessee filed return of loss on 25-8-1988. Claim of loss was disallowed on the ground that the return was filed beyond time prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. Assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which was allowed. Before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), assessee contended that the time specified for filing the return of loss in this case was 31-7-1988, but the application in Form No. 6 was filed on 30-7-1988 vide receipt No. 6 requesting therein that the time for furnishing the return may be…
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