9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (11) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , different views have been expressed by the High Courts in India. The petitioner in this case is a firm. It is an assessee to income-tax. The petitioner filed its return of income for the assessment year 1968-69 only on June 28, 1969, though it was due on June 30, 1968. That there was delay in filing the return was not noticed at the time of assessment for the assessment year 1968-69. Later, it was noticed by the CIT who took up suo motu revision. He held that the assessment was erroneous in so far as the assessing authority had failed to levy interest under s. 139 of the Act, and, therefore, the matter was remitted to the ITO to enable him to deal with the case in regard to the levy of interest. Pursuant to this, the ITO passed Ex. P-3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -s. (4)(a) of s. 139 of the Act. That reads : " (4)(a) Any person who has not furnished a return within the time allowed to him under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) may, before the assessment is made, furnish the return for any previous year at any time before the end of the period specified in clause (b), and the provisions of clause (iii) of the proviso to sub-section (1) shall apply in every such case." It may also be necessary to refer to s. 139(1). That obliges every person, if his total income or the total income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under the Act during the previous year exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax, to furnish a return of his income or the income of suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... istered firm or an unregistered firm which has been assessed under clause (b) of section 183, on the amount of tax which would have been payable if the firm had been assessed as an unregistered firm ; and (b) in any other case, on the amount of tax payable on the total income, reduced by the advance tax, if any, paid or by any tax deducted at source, as the case may be." It is, therefore, evident that obligation to file return within the time specified under s.139(1) is subject to an extension of the date, which extension is to be made by the ITO on an application made to him. Cls. (i) and (ii) deal with cases where the ITO is free to waive the interest whereas cl. (iii) deals with cases where he is obliged to charge interest. That is i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... art of it. In the context and scheme of the provision in s. 139 it cannot be that while interest is levied in respect of delayed returns under sub-ss. (1) and (2) where there is an extension on an application by the assessee, no interest is levied where the return is filed after a longer period and the assessee does not even apply for an extension. Logically in such a case also interest must be due. Evidently,the purpose and object of the clauses in sub-s. (4)(a) adverted to is to see that such interest is leviable in such a case. That is not disputed. In fact, even the decisions which take the view in favour of the assessee on the interpretation of this section have not held that this is not the object of the section. But the question is o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egistered firm which has been assessed under clause (b) of s. 183, on the amount of tax which would have been payable if the firm had been assessed as an unregistered firm, and (b) in any other case, on the amount of tax payable on the total income reduced by the advance tax, if any, paid or by any tax deducted at source, as the case may be." Instead of writing this into sub-s. (4)(a), for the sake of convenience, Parliament has made reference to cl. (iii) to the proviso to s. 139(1) to indicate the application of the above-said clause. The practice of construing statutes in a manner promoting the purpose and object of the Act and not too literally so as to defeat the purpose or render the provision meaningless and otiose is a well-accept ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the time to file return there would be no question of levy of interest under clause (iii) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 139 of the Income-tax Act. But evidently sub-section (4)(a) of section 139 was not noticed by the court as rightly held by the High Court of Mysore in Indian Telephone Industries Co-operative Society Ltd. v. ITO [1972] 86 ITR 566 (Mys)." The decision in Kishanlal Haricharan v. ITO [1971] 82 ITR 660 (AP) has recently been considered by a Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in ITO v. Secunderabad Tin Industries [1978] 113 ITR 1 and the Full Bench has overruled its earlier decision holding that the provision in s. 139(4)(a) has not been noticed by the Division Bench in the earlier decision. No doubt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
