TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 305X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a declaration. The constitution bench of the Supreme Court in SARDAR AMRJIT SING KALARA VS. PRAMOD GUPTA [ 2002 (12) TMI 607 - SUPREME COURT] has held that procedural laws have always been viewed as handmaid of justice and not to hamper the cause of justice. It has further been held that technical objection which tend to be stumbling blocks to defeat and delay substantial and effective justice should be viewed strictly for being discouraged except when mandate of law inevitably necessitates it. In the instant case, Section 10B of the Act does not provide for non compliance of submission of declaration. Therefore, the requirement of submission of declaration in terms of Section 10B(8) of the Act has to be treated as mandatory wher ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, the assessee cannot claim the benefit of carry forward of losses and provisions of section 10B(8) are contravened? 2. The factual background, in which the aforesaid substantial question of law arises for consideration, needs mention. The assessee is a software company. The assessee had filed the return for the Assessment Year 2001-02 on 31.10.2001 i.e., on the due date prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act. In the return, exemption under Section 10B of the Act was claimed, thereafter, by a communication dated 24.10.2002, filed before the Assessing Officer, the exemption was withdrawn before completion of the assessment i.e., 31.03.2004. Subsequently, revised return was filed on 23.12.2002, in which exemption under Section 10B of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... losses as the provisions of Section 10B(8) of the Act were contravened. On the other hand, learned Senior counsel for the assessee while inviting the attention of this court to Section 10B(8) of the Act contended that as per the aforesaid provision, submission of declaration is mandatory, whereas, date of submission of declaration is a directory requirement and the assessee had complied with the requirement of submission of declaration before completion of the assessment and therefore, the tribunal has rightly held the assessee to be entitled for benefit of carrying forward of losses under Section 72 of the Act. In support of aforesaid submissions, learned Senior counsel has referred to judgment of Delhi High Court dated 14.05.2008 in COM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bjection which tend to be stumbling blocks to defeat and delay substantial and effective justice should be viewed strictly for being discouraged except when mandate of law inevitably necessitates it. ( ALSO SEE: SAMBHAJI VS. GANGABAI, (2008) 17 SCC 117, RAJENDRA PRASAD GUPTA VS. PRAKASH CHANDRA MISHRA (2011) 11 SCALE 469 and RAMJI GUPTA AND ORS. VS. GOPI KRISHAN AGRAWAL (D) AND ORS. AIR 2013 SC 3099). In STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. VS. BIHAR RAJYA BHOOMI VIKAS BANK SAMITHI, (2018) 9 SCC 472, it has been held that if infraction of procedural provision does not provide for any consequences, such a provision has to be construed as directory. In the instant case, Section 10B of the Act does not provide for non compliance of submission of declara ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
