9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Petitioner's Counsels - S.M.K. Choudhary Respondent's Counsel - D.D. Chopra JUDGMENT 1. The present appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Act has been preferred against the order dated 28.10.2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Lucknow whereby the appeal preferred by the appellant has been dismissed. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows: For the assessment year 1990-91 the appellant filed return of loss which was processed under section 143 (1) (a) of the Act. Prima-facie adjustment to the extent of Rs.36,28,690/- was made resulting into liability of additional tax of Rs.3,12,655/-. The intimation dated 05.12.1990 was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 of Section 154 of the Act by Taxation Law Amendment Act 1984 w.e.f. 01.10.1984, the order passed within four years from the end of the financial year, means the financial year involved and not the financial year in which the order has been passed. 5. The parliament has given an extended period of limitation for passing the orders of rectification. Earlier the limitation was four years from the end of the date of the order whereas at present it is from the end of the financial year in which the order has been passed. This can be illustrated by following example: Suppose the order has been passed on 03.04.1983, the rectification order under the old provision could be passed only up till 02.04.1987 whereas after the amendment in the sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r it amounted to an income or not. At the time of filing of return, the assessee had not disclosed the amount of cash compensation received from the Government. Subsequently, the law was amended and clause 3(i) (b) in Section 28 of the Act was inserted by Finance Act 1990 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1967. The assessment year involved in the aforesaid case was 1989-90. The question of levy of additional tax arose and the Apex Court has held that on the date when the return was filed, there was no liability for non-inclusion of the amount of cash compensatory support in the income and therefore, the law prevailing on the date of filing of return has to be seen for the purposes of levy of additional tax. The principles laid down by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
