TMI Blog1974 (5) TMI 4X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income-tax Act, 1961 ? " - - - - - Dated:- 28-5-1974 - Judge(s) : M. R. A. ANSARI., P. N. KHANNA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by KHANNA J.-At the instance of the assessee, Messrs. Garg Co., the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench " B ", referred to this court under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the following questions : " (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a correct interpretation of the provisions of section 139(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, interest could be legally charged on the assessee as provided in proviso (iii) of section 139(1) of the Act? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally right in h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act. The return that was filed was under section 139(1). The revenue conceded the proposition that section 139(4) of the Act did not provide for " any specific class of return and that all returns filed under section 139(4) were in discharge of the obligation to file the return under section 139(1) and as such provisions of section 139(1) were applicable to the case. Referring to section 139(4), the Tribunal was of the opinion that it does not require an application to be made by an assessee for extension of time, and that if the assessee wanted to avail of the benefit of filing the return beyond the period provided for in clause (a) or (b) of section 139(1), the provisions regarding payment of interest had to be applied. The revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vided that on an application made in the prescribed manner the Income-tax Officer may, in his discretion, extend the date for the furnishing of the return,.......whether fixed originally or on extension, falls beyond the 30th day of September or, as the case may be, the 31st day of December of the assessment year, the provisions of sub-clause (iii) of the proviso to sub-section (1) shall apply..... (4) Any person who has not furnished a return within the time allowed to him under sub-section (1) or sub-section (21 may, before the assessment is made, furnish the return for any previous year at any time before the end of four assessment years from the end of the assessment year to which the return relates and the provision of sub-clause (ii ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on an oral application of the assessee, then the return would be a return within the time allowed to him under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2), as the case may be. Sub-section (4), which is being invoked by the revenue, would not be applicable at all. Secondly, 'the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 139 requires an application to be made in the prescribed manner, which requires the use of the prescribed form for getting the extension. The statute itself rules out specifically an oral application. There is no question of an oral application or an oral order extending the date for furnishing the return. Mr. Kirpal then contended that sub-section (4) does not apply the whole of the proviso to subsection (1) to the case. It is the inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... render sub-section (4) completely unworkable. This contention of the learned counsel has no substance. We are not privileged to read the language of a section in a manner different from the one in which the language is incorporated in the section. We cannot incorporate words in the statute which the legislature in its wisdom has not incorporated, nor can we ignore the words which the legislature has incorporated. This is more so when the statute to be interpreted is a fiscal statute. It is now well-settled that the language of such a statute has to be construed in its strict sense. The assessee is always entitled to the benefit of doubt, if any left in the language of the statute. Sub-section (4) applies the provisions of clause (iii) of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the Income-tax Officer may in such cases and under such circumstances as may be prescribed, reduce or waive the interest payable by any assessee under this sub-section..." The very fact that sub-section (8) has been amended shows that the legislature became conscious of the lacuna that had been left in the language of this section before its amendment and which has now been removed by introducing the amendment. The assessee, therefore, was entitled to the benefit of the said lacuna, and could not be called upon to pay interest, unless he had applied for extension of time and the extension sought for had been granted. Mr . S. B. Gupta, the learned counsel for the assessee, relied on a judgment of the Division Bench of the Andhra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
