TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 1176X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arred and the assessment is treated as nullity. Decided in favour of assessee. - DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : Sh. M.R. Sahu, CA For the Respondent : Sh. Atiq Ahmed, Sr.DR ORDER Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:- The present appeal has been filed by assessee against the order of Ld. NFAC/CIT(A), New Delhi dated 22.12.2022. 2. The undisputed facts are as under:- Particulars Assessee s case Assessment Year 2017-18 Original Return of Income 31.03.2018 1 st Defective Notice 03.06.2018 Defect removed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are not in dispute. 2.1 The petitioner/assessee had filed its original Return of Income (ROI) on 14- 10-2016. In the ROI, the petitioner/assessee declared a loss amounting to Rs. 3,85,73,772/-. On 6-2-2017, the petitioner/assessee was served with a notice under section 139(9). This notice stated that the ROI filed by the petitioner/assessee was defective and this regard made a reference to section 139(9) of the Act. 2.3 It is not in dispute that the petitioner/assessee removed the defects as pointed out by the respondent/revenue on 18-2-2017. 2.4 Evidently, the petitioner/assessee was served with another notice dated 10-7-2017, wherein, it was pointed out that the ROI filed for AY 2016-17 dated 14-10- 2016 contained defec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted that the impugned notices are time-barred since they have been issued beyond the time prescribed in the first proviso appended to Section 143(2) of the Act. In the relevant AY i.e., 2016-17, with effect from 1-6-2016, the time limit provided for serving a notice under section 143(2) of the Act was six (6) months from the end of the financial year (FY) in which the return is furnished. 5.1 Mr Lalchandani, thus, submits that the date for calculating limitation under the proviso to Section 143(2), would be six months (6) commencing from the last date of the FY in which the original ROI was filed i.e., 31-3-2017. Six (6) months after that i.e., 30-9-2017, would be the date on which limitation expires. 5.2 In support of the plea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essed. 10. Thus, the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner/assessee, that the return date relates back to the date on which the original ROI was filed seems to have been the yardstick that the AO applied in the instant case. The petitioner's plea, in this behalf, is supported by the decision taken by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Sohan Lal Chhajjan Mal case. The relevant observations made by the court read as follows: 5. A perusal of the aforementioned provision makes it evident that when the return of income furnished by the assessee is defective then the Assessing Officer is to intimate the defect to the assessee, afford him an opportunity to rectify the defect within a period of 15 days from the date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the return was invalid and he set aside the assessment so far as the charging of interest was concerned and directed the Assessing Officer to charge interest on the return from the date of the return till the date of furnishing the profit and loss account and balance-sheet. On further appeal, the Tribunal found that the return filed by the assessee was accepted by the Assessing Officer as a legally valid return and he had acted upon the same. The Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). On a reference made to the High Court, it was held that once the return has been found to be valid and only a defect within the meaning of section 139(9) of the Act was found then the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ROI originally filed on 14-10-2016 is taken into account, then, the impugned notices served on the petitioner/assessee would be time-barred, as the first proviso appended to Section 143(2) of the Act stipulated, at the relevant point in time, that the notice under the said Section could not have been served on the assessee, in this case, the petitioner, after the expiry of six (6) months from the end of the financial year in which the ROI is filed. For convenience, Section 143(2) and the first proviso appended to it [as amended by the Finance Act, 2016, with effect from 1-6-2016] is extracted hereafter: (2) Where a return has been furnished under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, the Ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
