9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the assessee is entitled to carry forward the business loss for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 despite filing the returns late. 2. The applicability of amendments to section 80 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, effective from April 1, 1985, on the carry forward of losses. 3. The relevance of judicial precedents and CBDT circulars in determining the carry forward of losses. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Entitlement to Carry Forward Business Loss Despite Late Filing of Returns: The main contention was whether the assessee could carry forward business losses for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 despite filing returns beyond the time limit prescribed under section 139(1). The lower authorities refused to allow the carry forward of losses, citing the late submission of returns. The assessee argued that returns filed under section 139(4) should be deemed valid for carrying forward losses, referencing judicial precedents such as the Calcutta High Court's decision in CIT v. Bangabasi Theatres (P.) Ltd. and Presidency Medical Centre (P.) Ltd. The Tribunal initially found in favor of the assessee, but upon further review, it was concluded that the returns filed beyond the time allowed under section 139(1) did not qualify for carrying forward losses as per the amended section 80. 2. Applicability of Amendments to Section 80 Effective from April 1, 1985: The amendment to section 80, effective from April 1, 1985, stipulated that losses could only be carried forward if the return was filed within the time allowed under section 139(1) or within any extended time allowed by the Income-tax Officer. The Tribunal's Accountant Member emphasized that this amendment introduced a mandatory condition for carrying forward losses, which was not present in the earlier provisions. The Third Member concurred, stating that the amended section 80 imposed a substantive restriction that returns must be filed within the specified time to qualify for loss carry forward. This amendment was intended to curb the practice of filing belated returns to claim loss carry forward benefits. 3. Relevance of Judicial Precedents and CBDT Circulars: The assessee relied on several judicial precedents and CBDT circulars to support their claim. The Judicial Member initially favored the assessee's position, referencing decisions such as Bangabasi Theatres (P.) Ltd. and Presidency Medical Centre (P.) Ltd., which dealt with pre-amendment provisions. However, the Accountant Member and the Third Member highlighted that these precedents were not applicable post-amendment. The Third Member also noted that the CBDT Circular No. 397 dated October 16, 1984, and Circular No. 469 dated September 23, 1986, clarified the legislative intent behind the amendment, reinforcing that losses could not be carried forward if returns were filed late. The decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Dogar Tools (P.) Ltd., which supported the assessee's claim, was found less persuasive compared to the Kerala High Court's decision in Smt. Gunavathy Dharamsy, which aligned with the amended provisions. Conclusion: The Tribunal, in accordance with the majority view, concluded that the assessee was not entitled to carry forward and set off losses for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87 due to the late filing of returns, as the conditions under the amended section 80 were not satisfied. The appeals were dismissed, affirming the necessity to comply with the time limits specified under section 139(1) to avail the benefit of loss carry forward.
|
