9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Interpretation of section 67A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 regarding the exclusion of time required for obtaining certified copies of orders from the Appellate Tribunal. - Application of section 67A in determining the timeliness of filing applications under section 66(1) of the Act. - Comparison of section 67A with section 268 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. - Consideration of condoning delay in filing applications under section 66(1) under section 5 of the Limitation Act. Analysis: The judgment by the Assam High Court involved the interpretation of section 67A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, specifically regarding the exclusion of the time required for obtaining certified copies of orders from the Appellate Tribunal. The court considered whether the applicants were entitled to exclude the time needed to obtain certified copies of orders before filing applications under section 66(1) of the Act. The court noted that section 66(1) required applications to be filed within sixty days of receiving notice of the order under section 33(4) of the Act. The Tribunal had rejected the applications as being beyond the sixty-day limit, without considering the provision of section 67A, which allows for the exclusion of time required for obtaining a copy of the order. Section 67A of the Act was analyzed by the court, which states that the time required for obtaining a copy of the order should be excluded in computing the period of limitation for an appeal or an application under the Act. The court emphasized the wide language of section 67A, allowing for the exclusion of time even if the copy of the order is not required to be filed along with the application. The court drew parallels with section 12(2) of the Indian Limitation Act, highlighting the importance of excluding time for obtaining copies for the appellant's ability to file an appeal promptly. Furthermore, the court addressed the argument that the time required for obtaining a copy should not be excluded if the copy has already been supplied under section 33(4) of the Act. The court rejected this distinction, emphasizing the plain language of section 67A and the absence of any such limitation within the section itself. The court disagreed with a previous decision of the Punjab High Court, asserting that the benefit of section 67A should be available to an assessee regardless of whether a copy has been supplied under section 33(4). The judgment also compared section 67A with section 268 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which replaced it. The court highlighted the differences in language between the two sections, particularly regarding the exclusion of time required for obtaining a copy if the copy has been furnished to the assessee. The court rejected the argument that the redrafting of the section in 1961 was to give effect to the decision of the Punjab High Court, emphasizing that if the benefit of excluding time was not available when a copy was given, there would have been no need to redraft the section. Lastly, the court considered the issue of condoning the delay in filing applications under section 66(1) under section 5 of the Limitation Act. The court opined that even if the applications were filed beyond the stipulated time, the delay should be condoned in the circumstances of the case. The court directed the Tribunal to treat the applications as having been filed within time and to dispose of them accordingly, allowing the petitions with costs assessed for each rule.
|
