9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (11) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of defects in application for registration as contemplated in sub-section (2) of section 185 of the Act where the application itself was not filed in time and the assessee did not make any request for condonation of delay in filing the application under the proviso to section 184(4) ? " It may be pointed out that the Tribunal at the instance of the revenue on an application under s. 256(1) of the Act had referred a question also to this court for opinion, namely : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Officer should consider that the filing of a declaration in Form No. 12 was an application for registration which was not in order within the meaning of section 185(2) read with section 184(6) of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enefit and the assessee was bound to satisfy the conditions prescribed by law which brought the benefit; and if there was a situation where the benefit was not available for non-compliance, no opportunity was necessary to be extended to the assessee under sub-s. (2) of s. 185 of the Act. The Tribunal took the view that the ITO was required to see whether the application was in the prescribed form and, therefore, he was bound to give an opportunity to the assessee to file an application in the prescribed form if the application before him was not in the prescribed form. The Tribunal, therefore, held that the CIT transgressed the principles of natural justice incorporated in s. 185(2) of the Act. The Tribunal accordingly directed the ITO to g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t rectified within such time, the Income-tax Officer may reject the application. " With effect from April 1, 1971, subsequent to the year in question, legislature has separately provided for application for registration in sub- s. (2) and the declaration in sub-s. (3) of s. 185 of the Act. In the instant case, the assessee was required to apply in Form No. 11A and was not entitled to furnish a declaration in Form No. 12. Assessee had not at all submitted an application inasmuch as a declaration in Form No. 12 had only been furnished. As already pointed out, Form No. 12 is not an application. A reading of the Forms Nos. 11, 11A on one side and Form No. 12 on the other makes the distinction clear. Sub-section (8) of s. 184 categorically pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant, that we should not allow technicalities to come in the way of our doing substantial justice to the parties. According to him substantial compliance with the rules set out above is sufficient to meet the ends of justice. In support of his plea he placed reliance on section 185(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. We are unable to accede to that contention. Section 185(2) of the 1961 Act is not retrospective in operation nor were the requirements of that provision complied with. The plea that substantial compliance with the rules is sufficient stands negatived by the decisions referred to earlier." As we have already pointed out, there was no application at all before the ITO, and, therefore, the question of applying sub-s. (2) of s. 18 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
