TMI Blog1996 (2) TMI 85X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that in computing the period of limitation for the purpose of section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, 'the date on which the assessee furnishes the report of such audit' in sub-clause (iii) of Explanation 1 to that section must be interpreted to include the 'date on which the assessee expresses his inability to furnish such audit report' ? " The brief facts giving rise to this reference are thus : The assessee is a firm. The assessment year in question is 1978-79, the relevant previous year being Diwali, 1977. The original assessment for the said assessment year was completed on September 24, 1981, under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act. Against this assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the assessee approached the Tribunal and the Tribunal after considering the matter, found that the assessment made by the Income-tax Officer on September 3, 1985, was barred by time and hence, the Tribunal reversed the findings of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and cancelled the order of the Income-tax Officer being barred by time. Hence, the Revenue approached the Tribunal for making a reference before this court and the Tribunal has referred the aforesaid questions of law for answer of this court. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. It is unfortunate that the matter was first decided by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on September 8, 1982. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. The provisions of the Income-tax Act have to be construed specifically. Being negligent on the part of the authorities cannot be countenanced for construing the provisions of limitation. In the present case, the Income-tax Officer has a maximum period specified for obtaining the report of the audit up to 180 days under section 142(2C) as provided in the proviso to this section. That period automatically stood curtailed when the Income-tax Officer was informed that the report was not likely to be received and as such the Income-tax Officer could have legitimately taken the period spent for obtaining the copy of the audit report up to the time when the intimation was given by the assessee that the report is not likely to come. In these cir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
