TMI Blog1992 (1) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the said assessment years within the prescribed time. The petitioners, on coming to know that their returns were not filed within the prescribed time, engaged another income-tax practitioner who filed them on December 4, 1980. The returns of income of the firm and the partners for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 were filed beyond a period of two years prescribed for completing the assessments for those years. The firm and the partners, on filing of the returns, as aforesaid, also paid tax under section 140A of the Act. The Income-tax Officer accepted the returns for the assessment years 1978-79 and 1979-80 and framed assessments accordingly. However, so far as the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 were concerned, since the returns for these years were filed beyond the prescribed period of two years for making assessments as aforesaid, the Income-tax Officer issued notices under section 148 of the Act against the firm and its partners. Since the returns were already filed, the firm and the partners, in response to the notices under section 148, stated that the said returns be treated as returns in response to the notices under section 148. The Income-tax officer, it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be dismissed. So far as, partner Chandulal Cheldas Patel-petitioner No. 3 in Special Civil Application No. 3583 of 1989 was concerned, the Commissioner, as in the case of the firm, held that the necessary conditions for invoking the provisions of section 273A of the Act were not fulfilled for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78. So far as the assessment year 1978-79 was concerned, the Commissioner waived penalty but refused to waive interest under section 139(8) and section 215 of the Act. Since neither penalty nor interest was charged for the assessment year 1979-80, the Commissioner rejected the said partner's application as being infructuous. An identical view has been taken in the case of the partner Mahendrakumar Chandulal patel-petitioner No. 4 in Special Civil Application No. 3583 of 1989. It was stated before us that the petitioners do not know whether any order under section 273A has been passed in the case of said partner Cheldas Khushaldas Patel, petitioner No. 2 in Special Civil Application No. 3583 of 1989. The petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 3583 of 1989, namely, the firm and its partners sought to challenge the aforesaid orders passed by the Commi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the case referred to in clause (ii), has, prior to the detection by the Income-tax Officer, of the concealment of particulars of income or of the inaccuracy of particulars furnished in respect of such income, voluntarily and in good faith, made full and true disclosure of such particulars ; (c) in the cases referred to in clause (iii), has, prior to the issue of a notice to him under sub-section (2) of section 139, or where no such notice has been issued and the period for the issue of such notice has expired, prior to the issue of notice to him under section 148, voluntarily and in good faith made full and true disclosure of his income and has paid the tax on the income so disclosed, and also has, in all the cases referred to in clauses (a), (b) and (c), co-operated in any enquiry relating to the assessment of his income and has either paid or made satisfactory arrangements for the payment of any tax or interest payable in consequence of an order passed under this Act in respect of the relevant assessment year . . . (3) where an order has been made under sub-section-(1) in favour of any person, whether such order relates to one or more assessment years, he shall not be e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore assessment years and, by one common order, waive penalty and/or interest for one or more assessment years. However, once an order waiving penalty and interest in respect of one or more assessment years is made in respect of an assessee, no order granting such relief for any other assessment year can be made in favour of the same assessee. The Commissioner, in the case of the firm, refused to waive penalty and interest for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 only on the ground that the returns filed beyond the prescribed period could not be considered to be returns in the eye of law. As pointed out above, since the returns for the said two assessment years were filed beyond the period prescribed for making assessment, the Income-tax Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act and at the request of the petitioners treated the returns which were earlier filed as returns filed in response to the notice under section 148. It is urged on behalf of the Revenue that disclosure of income voluntarily and in good faith, as envisaged under sub-clauses (a) and (c) of sub-section (1), could be made only by filing valid return and, if disclosure was not made by a valid return, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by a letter or an application to the taxing authority. In the instant case, the petitioners had filed returns of income for four years for the assessment years 1976-77 to 1979-80, almost at the same time go far as returns for 1976-77 and 1977-78 are concerned, they were filed after the period for making assessment had expired. Therefore, so far as these two years are concerned, the Income-tax Officer issued notices under section 148 and, as pointed out above, the returns which were already filed were treated as returns in response to the said notices. These returns, though filed after the expiry of the period prescribed for making assessment, did disclose the petitioners' total income. We, therefore, fail to see why these returns could not have been treated as disclosure of income made by the petitioners within the meaning of sub-clauses (a) and (c) of sub-section (1) of section 273A. As held by us, the said provision does not require the filing of a valid return for making disclosure. The Commissioner was, therefore, wrong in not treating the returns of income filed by the petitioners for the assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 as a disclosure and in refusing to grant relief to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not disputed that all the petitioners had voluntarily and in good faith filed returns of income for the said assessment years disclosing their income and since the Commissioner has not stated any other grounds for not granting to the petitioners the relief by way of waiver of penalty and interest, they are entitled to such relief. So far as the assessment year 1978-79 is concerned, as pointed out above, the Commissioner has waived in full penalty and interest in the case of the firm. However, so far as the two partners, namely, Chandulal Cheldas Patel and Mahendrakumar Chandulal Patel, are concerned, the Commissioner has waived penalty but refused to waive interest under section 139(8) and section 215 of the Act for the assessment year 1978-79. There appears to be no reason or justification not to waive interest under section 139(8) and section 215 of the Act for the assessment year 1978-79. So far as the assessment year 1979-80 is concerned, no penalty or interest has been levied and, therefore, the question of waiver does not arise in the case of the firm and its partners. The partner, Cheldas Khushaldas Patel in whose case no order under section 273A has been passed is entitled ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
