9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (9) TMI 147X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in directing carry forward of losses claimed by the assessee and he ought to have set aside the assessment with a direction to make fresh assessment as per law and also directed to examine the assessee's claim for having filed application for extension of time. 2. The relevant facts are that the assessee is a company and it filed return of loss on 26-9-1986, though the due date for filing the return was 30th June, 1986. The assessee applied for extension of time in Form No. 6 on 30-6-1986 seeking time up to 30-9- 1986. This is evidenced by the xerox copy of Form No. 6 and also xerox copy of the local delivery book maintained by the assessee, which has been acknowledged by the department. Therefore t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessments already completed before the enactment of the-amending Act will not be rectified. Further, keeping in view, the fact that the new sub-section (3) comes into force with effect from 1st April 1987, a return of loss filed for the assessment year 1986-87 or earlier years within the prescribed period as per the existing provisions will not be denied the benefit of the carry forward of loss." Therefore I uphold the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 5. As regards the plea of the revenue contained in the grounds of appeal that the assessment order should be set aside and the assessing officer should be directed to verify the claim of having filed petition for extension of time is merely a technical aspect and this contention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed. In the case of CIT v. Vishwanath Khirwal [1986] 161 ITR 382 the Patna High Court held that when once the assessee applies for extension of time for filing the return and the Income-tax Officer did not reject the prayer for extension of time and did not communicate it to the assessee then it has to be presumed that the assessee was right in assuming that extension of time had been granted. In the case of Harmanjit Trust v. CIT [1984] 148 ITR 214 the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a duty is cast on the Income-tax Officer to intimate to the assessee whether its request for extension of time for furnishing the return has been granted or refused. If there is no reply within a reasonable time from the Income-tax Officer the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
