9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (7) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the provisions of section 185(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and consequently the benefit of continuance of registration could not have effect for the assessment year 1971-72 ? " The facts leading to this reference may be briefly stated. In the assessment year 1971-72, the assessee-firm which has been constituted under a deed of partnership dated August 1, 1967, consisted of the following partners : 1. Seth Suganchand, 2. Sri Tarachand s/o Sri Suganchand, 3. Smt. Mayadevi w/o Sri Jairamadass, 4. Smt. Poonam Devi w/o Sri Veerbhan Das. The firm had been granted registration on the basis of this partnersbip for the first time in the year 1969-70 and the registration continued till 1970-71. For the assessment year 1971-72 the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... basis of which the registration was granted ; and (ii) the firm furnishes, along with its return of income for the assessment year concerned, a declaration to that effect, in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner." "185. (3) Where the Income-tax Officer considers that the declaration furnished by a firm in pursuance of sub-section (7) of section 184 is not in order, he shall intimate the defect to the firm and give it an opportunity to rectify the defect in the declaration within a period of one month from the date of such intimation ; and if the defect is not rectified within that period, the Income-tax Officer shall, by order in writing, declare that the registration granted to the firm shall not have effect for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claration. It appears that on the 15th September, 1971, i.e., about 2 1/2 months later, an application was moved before the Income-tax Officer requesting that at the time of the submission of the application in Form No. 12, the lady partners were not present and, therefore, Form No. 12 had been signed by one of the partners. It was prayed that the lady partners be permitted to sign the application in Form No. 12. This request was refused and the Income-tax Officer held that inasmuch as it was a case of renewal of registration and not a case under section 185(2) or (3) the assessee could not be permitted to remedy the defect. On appeal,the Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that Shri Tarachand, had signed as Shrimati Maya Jairamdas and n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of rule 22. There is no dispute that the declaration was made in Form No. 12. The only dispute is as to whether it was signed by the persons concerned in accordance with sub-rule (5) of rule 22. Rule 22(5) enjoins that it was to be signed personally by all the partners. In the present case, on the findings recorded, Mayadevi had not signed the declaration inasmuch as Tarachand had forged her signatures. The forged signatures of Mayadevi could not, in law, be treated to be the signature of Mayadevi. The argument raised on behalf of the assessee is that the non-signing of the application by Shrimati Mayadevi was a defect, which could be rectified under section 185(3) of the Act. On behalf of the department, however, it has been urged that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... includes an omission must necessarily depend upon the context in which the word is used. In our opinion, having regard to the context it would be unreasonable to hold that the word 'defect' under section 36(4) excludes all cases of omission to specify the details prescribed by the statute in the nomination paper. We must, accordingly reject the appellants' argument that the omission in question is not a defect under section 36(4). " The principle that emerges from this decision is that where a particular word has not been defined in the statute the meaning attributable to it depends upon the context in which the word is used. In Manmata Nath Chakravarty v. Sachindra Kumar Chakravarty AIR 1956 Cal 59 a question arose as to the interpreta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the Code of Civil Procedure covers cases of fraud (sic). There is also nothing in the context of the Act which impels us to come to the conclusion that the word defect as occurring in section 185(3) will cover cases of fraudulent submission of declarations in Form No. 12. It is worthy of note that although the first part of section 185(3) contemplates declarations which are not in order, and may cover cases where fraudulent declarations are submitted, by the latter part of section 185(3) the Income-tax Officer is enjoined to intimate only " the defect " in the declaration. If the intention of the legislature were to give an assessee an opportunity of remedying all disorderly declarations, whatever be the nature of the lacuna it would not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
