9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 456X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s necessary for adjudication of the present petition as narrated therein are that the petitioner deposited income tax for the assessment year 2005-06 vide challan dated 11.5.2004 (Annexure P-1) amounting to Rs. 3,60,000/-. The petitioner filed his original return for the assessment year 2005-06 on 26.7.2005 (Annexure P-2) declaring taxable income of Rs. 1,97,960/- on which the petitioner had deposited Rs. 12,336/- as tax and Rs. 1,188/- as interest. However, the petitioner had omitted to claim the credit of Rs. 3,60,000/-. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a revised return on 26.9.2006 (Annexure P-3) claiming refund of Rs. 3,61,188/-. An application dated 7.3.2008 (Annexure P-4) was submitted by the petitioner and thereafter various remind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e orders passed by the respondents and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the defence of the revenue is not acceptable. It would be advantageous to reproduce Section 139(5) of the Act which reads thus:- "139(5). If any person, having furnished a return under sub-section (1), or in pursuance of a notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142, discovers any omission or any wrong statement therein, he may furnish a revised return at any time before the expiry of one year from the end of the relevant assessment year or before the completion of the assessment whichever is earlier: Provided that where the return relates to the previous year relevant to the assessment y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down in the Act for imposing liability upon the tax payer". In the scheme of things, as noted above, the intimation under section 143(1)(a) cannot be treated to be an order of assessment. The distinction is also well brought out by the statutory provisions as they stood at different points of time. Under section 143(l) (a) as it stood prior to April 1, 1989, the Assessing Officer had to pass an assessment order if he decided to accept the return, but under the amended provision, the requirement of passing of an assessment order has been dispensed with and instead an intimation is required to be sent. Various circulars sent by the Central Board of Direct Taxes spell out the intent of the Legislature, i.e., to minimize the departmental work t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the present case. Therefore, the assessee for assessment year 2005- 06 could file the revised return after complying with the provisions of Section 139(5) of the Act up to 31.3.2007. The revised return filed on 26.9.2006 was thus validly filed within limitation. Consequently, the claim of the petitioner-assessee for the refund of the additional tax deposited amounting to Rs. 3,61,188/- is valid and justified. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Roadmaster Industries of India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax and another, (2009) 329 ITR 69 to canvass that the petitioner was also entitled to interest from the date the amount was deposited till the date of granti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
