TMI Blog1985 (4) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the effect that before the said assessment was completed by the Income-tax Officer on March 16, 1971, two revised returns were filed by the assessee, one on May 16, 1970, and the other on July 7, 1970, as certain alleged omissions had occurred in the original return filed on July 7, 1966, but the assessment was made by the Income-tax Officer on March 16, 1971, ignoring the said revised returns and as such the said assessment was bad. It was submitted before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner by the assessee that in the first return filed on July 7, 1966, the status of the assessee was not correctly declared and necessary particulars were not furnished in Part III of the return in respect of the names and other particulars of the partner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the date of filing of the revised return under section 139(5) of the Act. Thus, the assessment on the basis of the revised return should have been completed by July 6, 1971. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment on March 6, 1971, with reference to the original return filed on July 7, 1966, and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner passed an appellate order on July 27, 1973, when the time-limit for completion of the relevant assessment with reference to the revised return filed on July 7, 1970, expired in view of the provision of section 153(1)(c) of the Act. The Tribunal held that the impugned assessment was not legal and that being so when the time-limit for completion of the relevant assessment has already expired, the Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 53(1)(a) provides that no order of assessment shall, be made under section 143 or section 144 at any time after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year in which the income was first assessable where such assessment year is an assessment year commencing on or before the I St day of April, 1967. This is the normal period of limitation. Where, however, an assessee files a belated return under section 139(4) or a revised return under section 139(5), the said period of limitation is extended in terms of clause (c) of section 153(1). In such a case, the assessment has to be completed within the period of one year from the date of filing of such return notwithstanding expiry of the normal period of limitation. It obviously doe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me-tax Officer ignoring the revised return may be an erroneous assessment but it will not be a nullity, the assessment having been made within the period of limitation. The Income-tax Officer may have committed an error but such an error is within his jurisdiction which would not render the assessment void. In the instant case, the assessment has been completed on a return filed by the assessee within the period prescribed under section 153(1)(a) of the Act. It was not contended that in view of the subsequent return filed, the original return was invalid or non est. Section 139(5) permits an assessee, if he discovers an omission or wrong statement in the original return to file a revised return at any time before the assessment is made., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by anything which he might have omitted to do in the original order of assessment which was set aside by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. In this case, the entire assessment order was challenged and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, after accepting the contention of the assessee about the infirmity in the assessment, set aside the assessment directing the Income-tax Officer to make a fresh assessment. The Income-tax Officer in reframing the assessment can take into account all the returns filed before him. Section 153(3)(ii) of the Act provides that where an assessment is made in consequence of or to give effect to any finding or direction contained in the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner under section 250 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 153(3)(ii), the bar of limitation is raised. The Tribunal did not correctly appreciate the scope of section 153(3). Where an assessment is made ignoring the material on record, it may be an illegal assessment but it cannot be said that such assessment could not have been made at all by the Income-tax Officer. The Income-tax Officer has the jurisdiction to assess the income of the assessee under section 143 of the Act. In doing so, he may have acted erroneously. The appellate authority can always correct the error committed by the Income-tax Officer. The Tribunal proceeded on the footing that the Income-tax Officer having completed the assessment ignoring the revised returns, made no assessment at all and pursuant to the direction of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
