2009 (12) TMI 656 - HC - Income Tax

Payment of interest salary bonus commission or remuneration to the partners of the firm - failures referred to in section 144(1)(a) - dis- allowances under section 184(5) - held that - it cannot be said that an assessee who filed a return based on notice issued under section 148 is not involved in any of the failures referred to in section 144(1) which the assessee admittedly has committed inasmuch as the assessee has not filed a regular return under section 139. - So much so failures referred to in section 144(1) are absolute failures which cannot be remedied by filing returns based on notice under section 148 of the Act. - Decided against the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Justification of Tribunal confirming revision order under section 263 of the Income-tax Act.
2. Entitlement to deduction by the appellant-assessee for payment of interest, salary, bonus, commission, or remuneration to partners of the firm in an assessment under section 147 for the assessment year 1995-96.
3. Interpretation of sections 184(5) and 148(1) of the Income-tax Act.

Analysis:

1. The issue raised was whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the revision order issued by the Commissioner under section 263 of the Income-tax Act. The Commissioner directed revision of the assessment as the Assessing Officer allowed deductions towards remuneration, salary, interest, etc., paid by the assessee-firm to the partners, which was deemed a violation of section 184(5) of the Act. Despite the assessee's appeal, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order, leading to the current appeal.

2. The appellant-assessee contended that the disallowances under section 184(5) were not applicable due to filing a return pursuant to the notice issued under section 148(1). However, the Tribunal rejected this argument. The failures attracting disallowances under section 184(5) include not filing a return voluntarily or complying with notice terms. The Commissioner ordered revision based on the failure to file a return, leading to the denial of deductions claimed by the assessee-firm.

3. The Court analyzed sections 184(5) and 148(1) to determine the scope and applicability of the provisions. The failures under section 144(1) that result in disallowances under section 184(5) include not filing returns under specific sections or complying with notice terms. Filing a return based on a notice under section 148 does not absolve the assessee from the failures under section 144(1). The Court held that the filing of a return under section 148 does not equate to filing a return under section 139, and the assessee cannot evade the disallowances under section 184(5) by doing so.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, confirming the Commissioner's order under section 263 that the assessee was not entitled to deductions allowed by the Assessing Officer under section 147, as it violated section 184(5) due to the failures committed by the assessee under section 144(1). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.