9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Assessment barred by limitation under s. 144B - Revised return filed - Jurisdictional order under s. 125A - Applicability of Expln. I cl. (iv) of s. 153 - Disallowances challenged. Analysis: The judgment involves an appeal against the assessment order made by the ITO, Central Circle, Jamnagar, under s. 143(3) r/w s. 144B of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1980-81. The primary issue raised by the assessee pertains to the question of limitation, arguing that the assessment order was time-barred due to the filing of a revised return and the jurisdictional order under s. 125A. The appellant contended that the assessment order, passed on 29th June, 1984, was beyond the prescribed time limit, emphasizing the concurrent jurisdiction of the IAC, Central Range-II, Ahmedabad. The department, however, argued that the assessment was within the time limit as per the provisions of s. 144B and Expln. I cl. (iv) of s. 153. The Tribunal, after considering the facts, concluded that the assessment was indeed time-barred. The Tribunal analyzed the relevant provisions of the IT Act concerning the time limit for assessments. It noted that the original return was filed on 12th June, 1980, and as per s. 153(1)(a)(iii), the assessment should have been completed by 31st March, 1983. However, with the filing of a revised return on 22nd Feb., 1983, the assessment deadline was extended to 22nd Feb., 1984 under s. 153(1)(c). Despite this, the ITO sought directions from the IAC under s. 144B, which would have allowed an additional 180 days for assessment completion. The Tribunal, however, observed that the jurisdictional order issued under s. 125A on 29th Aug., 1983, granting concurrent jurisdiction to the IAC, rendered the provisions of s. 144B inapplicable in this case, thus negating the extension of time. The Tribunal relied on precedents and the language of s. 144B to support its conclusion that the assessment was time-barred. It highlighted that the jurisdictional order empowered the IAC to perform the duties of the ITO, making s. 144B inapplicable. Citing decisions of Special Benches and previous Tribunal rulings, the Tribunal held that the assessment order, passed on 29th June, 1984, exceeded the statutory time limit. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and annulled the assessment on grounds of being barred by limitation. In light of the finding on the limitation issue, the Tribunal refrained from addressing the other grounds raised by the appellant related to various disallowances. The Tribunal emphasized that since the assessment itself was deemed time-barred, it was unnecessary to delve into the merits of the disallowances at that stage. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order under appeal and annulling the assessment due to being barred by limitation.
|
