1993 (11) TMI 19

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... led a revised return on March 5, 1974, showing the additional income by disclosing the fact that during the relevant period he had sold his truck. The Income-tax Officer passed an order on February 7, 1975, and that order was challenged by the assessee before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax. Before the appellate authority, it was contended that the order passed by the Income-tax Officer was beyond the prescribed time. The appellate authority rejected the said contention. Aggrieved by the said order of the appellate authority, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal also rejected the said contention. Thereafter, at the instance of the assessee, the following question is ref .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er section 153(1)(c) of the Act. It may, therefore, be noted that the extended time-limit of one year under section 153(1)(c) will not be available in respect of a revised return of income purported to have been filed under section 139(5) where originally the return was filed under section 139(4)." He submitted that the aforesaid instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes is binding on the Income-tax Officer and, therefore, the assessment order passed by the Income-tax Officer on February 7, 1975, was beyond the time-limit, as it was not passed within the period of two years from the end of the assessment year in question. As against this, Mr. Shelat, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue, vehemently submitted that the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the purposes of assessment and computation of the period of limitation. The starting point of limitation with regard to a return filed under section 139(4) of the Act would be the date of the filing of the return and if subsequently return or returns have been filed, the date of the filing of the last of such of the returns (provided the same had been filed within the period of limitation). We prima facie agree with the aforesaid view expressed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, but, at the same time, in this case, in our view, it would not be necessary to decide the aforesaid question because of the instruction issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes upon which learned counsel for the assessee places reliance. Since the effect of the af .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X