9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (10) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e years 1975-76 to 1983-84 every year in accordance with the provisions of law. On January 24, 1986, the appellants herein filed an application under section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called "the Act"), before the Commissioner of Income-tax, Madras, stating therein that, in the returns filed by the appellants under the Act, they had omitted to claim the benefit under section 80HH of the Act since they had not been advised properly by the chartered accountant at that time and that the appellants had later on engaged the services of another chartered accountant who advised them that the benefit of section 80HH of the Act could be claimed by them. It was stated that it was due to a mistake that the benefit was not claimed fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner recorded, on the basis of the materials before him, that there was no evidence to show that the appellants/assessees were carrying on any manufacturing activity during the periods 1975-76 to 1983-84. It was found on facts that the assessees were only buying yarn, selling the same to weavers and purchasing the finished products and that no manufacturing activity was carried on by the assessees at all during the relevant period, and, therefore, the assessees were not entitled to any relief under section 80HH of the Act. Apart from recording this finding on merits, the Commissioner also found that no proper explanation has been given for the delay in preferring the application under section 264 of the Act and that no case has been made out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the industrial undertaking for the previous year relevant to the assessment year for which the deduction is claimed have been audited by an accountant as defined in the Explanation below sub-section (2) of section 288 and the assessee furnishes along with his return of income the report of such audit in the prescribed form duly signed and verified by such an accountant (vide section 80HH(5)). In the present case, admittedly, the assessees/appellants had not furnished along with the returns of income or even with their application filed under section 264 of the Act any report of audit in the prescribed form duly signed and verified by the auditor. Not only this. It is seen from a perusal of the order of the Commissioner that the materials o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efit under section 80HH of the Act. The submission of learned counsel for the appellants that, even if the appellants had failed to claim the benefit of the deduction, it was an obligation of the Income-tax Officer to have granted the relief under section 80HH of the Act, is futile because the obligation imposed on the Incometax Officer as per section 84 (even though since deleted with effect from April 1, 1968) of the Act to grant relief even where an assessee had omitted to claim the relief is an obligation which could be discharged provided factual materials and clear data were available on the record, sufficient to enable the Income-tax Officer to consider whether the relief could be granted to the assessee (see with advantage Anchor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
