TMI Blog1975 (9) TMI 28X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an application claiming registration of the firm. The accounting period for the relevant assessment year ended on December 31, 1963. The application for registration was filed on 30th of June, 1966--2 1/2 years beyond time in view of the statutory provision that the application has to be filed during the previous accounting year. The Income-tax Officer rejected the application by saying : " Application for claiming registration has been filed on June 30, 1966. The application is clearly out of time. Although the firm is genuine, registration cannot be granted as the application was not filed within the time prescribed by law. Hence, the application is rejected. " The Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the appeal by saying : " ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ovisions under section 185(1). It is not disputed that the application submitted by the assessee was clearly beyond the prescribed time and it is also conceded that there was no evidence in support of the fact that the assessee had filed any petition for condonation of delay. In the circumstances, the Income-tax Officer, in our view, has no jurisdiction to entertain the application at all as, under section 184, prima facie, he could entertain an application made after the end of the previous year only if he is satisfied that the firm was prevented by sufficient cause from making the application before the end of the previous year. Apart from the nomenclature or label assigned to his order we have to consider, having regard to the correct fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to rectify the defect in the application within a period of one month from the date of such intimation ; and if the defect is not rectified within that period, the Income-tax Officer shall, by order in writing, reject the application. " Two decisions of the Madras High Court have been cited before us for the proposition that it is incumbent on the assessee to show cause why delay in filing of an application for registration should be excused and it is not for the Income-tax Officer to call upon the assessee to show cause. (See Pannalal Ramkumar Co. v. Income-tax Officer [1970] 75 ITR 309 (Mad) and A.S.S.S.S. Chandrasekaran v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1974] 96 ITR 711 (Mad)). In the latter case, it has been further observed that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
