9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (6) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrectness of the additions made. The Commissioner (Appeals), while holding that the assessment was within time, restored the matter to the ITO for giving an opportunity to the assessee to cross-examine certain parties. 4. The only ground taken in the appeal is that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the assessment made in the case was within the period of limitation and was valid. 5. The assessee filed a return of income on 10-5-1978. He filed another return on 5-1-1979. The assessment was completed on 4-1-1980. As the assessment year involved was 1976-77, the normal period for completing the assessment was up to 31-3-1979. The assessment on 4-1-1980 will be beyond the extended period of one year available from 10-5-197 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the end of the assessment year. 8. Under section 139(4) an assessee who has not furnished a return within the time allowed to him under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 139 may, before the assessment is made, file a return within a period of two years from the end of the assessment year when the assessment year commences on or after 1-4-1969. Under sub-section (5) of section 139 an assessee who has furnished a return under sub-section (1) or (2) of section 139 can file a revised return at any time before the assessment is made. It is, therefore, not disputed that a return under sub-section (4) of section 139 can be filed only within a period of two years from the end of the assessment year. In the present case, both the ret ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thin the prescribed period. He filed another return on 15-1-1974 which was outside the prescribed period. The Special Bench was considering the question whether the extended period for completing the assessment under section 153(1)(c) can be reckoned from the return filed on 15-1-1974. It was in this context that the Special Bench held that more than one return could be filed under section 139(4) provided they are within the period of two years prescribed by section 139(4). The Tribunal further held that a revised return under section 139(5) can be filed only when an assessee had filed a return under sub-section (1) or (2) and that only in such case a period of one year can be reckoned from the date of the revised return. It was, therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ght years will be available from the end of the assessment year as the present case is one failing within clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Act. It was pointed out in this connection that the ITO had found that the assessee had concealed income to the extent of Rs. 85,000. We do not consider it necessary to go into the question in view of our finding in favour of the department on the main contention advanced. It was also pointed out by the learned counsel for the assessee that the Tribunal should not express any opinion on the question of concealment as the entire assessment has now gone back to the ITO as per the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals). This will be another reason for not dealing with the contention at this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
