9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (6) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 28th November 1974. On being asked the representative of the assessee stated before the Income-tax Officer that the assessee must have filed Form No. 12 within time, but he expressed that the a receipt for filing the same is not traceable with him. The Income-tax Officer pointed out that in the office search was made and there was no such filing of Form No. 12 by the assessee for this assessment year. As the assessee could not produce the evidence showing the filing of Form No. 12 within time, the Income-tax Officer did not accept the version of the assessee that it might have been filed earlier. The Income-tax Officer, therefore, held that the assessee filed the declaration in Form No. 12 under s. 184 (7) only on 28th November 1974. The In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endment made of law in this respect and want of evidence regarding declaration in time, confirmed the order of the Income-tax Officer. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the AAC, the assessee has filed the present appeal on the ground that the assessee firm was registered under the said Act for the assessment year 1960-61 and that the application having always been filed in time, the registration has been continued for the assessment years 1961-62 to 1971-72 and also in the subsequent assessment year 1973-74. It has also been filed in time for the assessment year 1974-75 on 21st June, 1974 and for 1975-76 on 23rd April, 1975. The assessee has pleaded that the declaration in Form No. 12 for continuation of registration was filed on 9th June ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th January 1972. (e) Explanation in response to notice u/s. 140A for 1971-72 filed on 6th Jan., 1975. 7. The assessee has also pleaded that the following papers filed by the partners of the assessee firm were also not traceable : (a) Form No. 6 for 1971-72 filed on 28th June, 1971. (b) Written explanation filed on 9th June 1972 for 1971-72. The assessee has also pleaded before us that the declaration was filed on 9th June, 1972, but as it was not traceable, another declaration was filed on 28th November, 1974, and that the firm has been treated as registered firm for the assessment years 1961-62 to 1971-72 and also for the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75. Thus, the assessee has pleaded that only in the assessment year 1972-73 the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the assessment. Once it is believed that the assessee had filed Form No. 12 on 9th June, 72, the continuation of registration has to be allowed to the assessee firm. 11. The assessee has also pointed out that not only Form No. 12 was filed on 9th June, 1972, but various other explanations and forms were filed both by the assessee firm and its partners, but even those papers are not traceable in the file. This circumstance goes to show that the possibility of misplacement of declaration form filed on 9th June, 1972 cannot be ruled out. Under such circumstances we have to hold that the probabilities are in favour of the assessee and that the assessee filed declaration in Form No. 12 on 9th June, 1972 and as it became untraceable, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from a perusal of this ruling, it is evident that a distinction has been made after the amendment by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1970 and in view of the interpretation put by their Lordships it is evident that the firm has to file the return before the expiry of the time allowed under sub-s. (1) and sub-s. (2) of s. 139 for furnishing the return of income for such subsequent assessment year and that the Income-tax Officer has been given the power to condone the delay if sufficient cause for delay is proved. Thus, this ruling will not help the assessee as discussed in detail in this ruling. However, we hold that the assessee had filed the declaration on 9th June, 1972 before the due date for filing the return and as it was misplaced, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the decision of this Tribunal, we hold that when the Income-Tax Officer assessed the assessee in the status of U.R.F., the assessee has a right of appeal as the assessee under s. 246 of the said Act can file appeal relating to the status taken by him. The assessee has asserted that the status should be taken as registered firm and not as unregistered firm. Hence, we hold that the appeal is maintainable.
15. In view of our discussions above, we hold that the assessee is entitled to be treated as registered firm. We direct the Income-tax Officer to allow continuation of registration of the assessee and assess the assessee in the status of a registered firm.
16. In the result, the appeal is allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
