9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 638X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 being declined on the ground that the appellant did not file its return for the relevant assessment year within the period prescribed under Section 139 (1) of the Act. The facts are not much in dispute. Section 80-IB of the Act allows certain deductions if an industry is established in a backward area. Such deductions are allowed for a period of ten years. A condition for obtaining the benefit of such deductions is that the return for the relevant year should be filed within the time prescribed under Section 139(1) of the Act. Such condition is imposed by Section 80AC of the Act and the wording of the material part is couched in a negative fashion: "...no such deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... boi & Associates) . The appellant also fairly submits that there is a previous judgment of this Court reported at 370 ITR 305 (CIT v. Shelcon Properties P. Ltd.) where this Court had taken an adverse view on the issue directly involved in the present case. The judgment in S. R. Batliboi was based on the Supreme Court dictum in the judgment reported at (1970) 77 ITR 518 SC (CIT v. Kulu Valley Transport Co. P. Ltd.). As a matter of fact, the Kulu Valley Transport judgment was also considered in course of the Shelcon Properties P. Ltd. judgment and it was held that the dictum would not apply to a case governed by Section 80-IB of the Act read with the condition imposed by Section 80AC thereof. In Kulu Valley Transport, the assessee did not f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee filed his returns of income "on or before the due dates specified under" Section 139 (1) of the Act, there is no question of referring to the extended period permitted under Section 139(4) of the Act to seek the benefit. Indeed, if the embargo were not as strict as is evident from the relevant provision, the entirety of Section 139 would have been mentioned in the relevant expression in Section 80AC of the Act which would have included within its sweep the extended period under sub-section (4) thereof. But in such provision referring only to sub-section (1) of Section 139 of the Act, the reference to the other provisions of Section 139 must be understood to have been excluded. Since the legal issue raised by the appellant is directly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
