2006 (12) TMI 87 - HC - Wealth-tax

Wealth tax - Assessee filed belated returns for the assessment years 1967-68 to 1973-74 under section 15 of the Act on February 28, 1974, in terms of the law laid down by the hon ble Supreme Court in Kumar Jagdish Chandra s case 1996 220 ITR 67, held that a belated return filed under section 139(4) of the Act could not be revised and the revised returns filed being invalid in law could not have been acted upon Assessment made on revised return is time barred

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether a return filed under section 15 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, could be subsequently revised in terms of section 15 itself and if the assessment order passed by the Wealth-tax Officer was barred by limitation under section 17A of the Act for the assessment year in dispute.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a question of law referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the revision of a return filed under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The assessee had originally filed returns for the assessment years 1967-68 to 1973-74 on February 28, 1974, which were later revised on March 28, 1979. The assessments were initially completed within one year of the revised returns, but fresh assessments were made on June 30, 1983, leading to objections by the assessee and subsequent appeals. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner quashed the assessments as being barred by limitation, a decision upheld by the Tribunal.

2. The issue of revising belated returns had conflicting opinions among various High Courts. The Delhi, Allahabad, Rajasthan, and Kerala High Courts held that belated returns could not be revised, while the Calcutta and Madras High Courts had differing views. The matter was referred to the Punjab and Haryana High Court due to the lack of a judgment from the Supreme Court or the jurisdictional High Court at the relevant time.

3. After detailed examination, the High Court aligned with the view that belated returns filed under section 139(4) of the Act could not be revised. The judgments of the Delhi, Allahabad, Rajasthan, and Kerala High Courts were approved, while the contrary view of the Calcutta High Court was rejected. Citing the Supreme Court's decision in a similar case, the High Court ruled that the belated returns filed by the assessee could not be revised or acted upon, leading to the question of law being answered in favor of the assessee and against the Revenue.

4. The High Court's decision was consistent with previous rulings and followed the Supreme Court's position on the matter. The judgment provided clarity on the issue of revising belated returns under the Wealth-tax Act, ensuring uniformity in interpretation and application of the law across different High Courts.