9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (7) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncing from the date on which the Income-tax Officer forwards the draft order under sub-section (1) of section 144B to the assessee and ending with the date on which the Income-tax Officer receives the directions from the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner under sub-section (4) of that section, or, in a case where no objections to the draft order are received from the assessee, a period of thirty days" shall be excluded while computing the period of limitation for making the assessment. In other words, the time not exceeding 180 days envisaged under clause (iv) of the Explanation is to be added to 31-3-1983 and if the assessment has been made within such extended period, then it would be saved from limitation. On the other hand, if the assessment has been made not even within this extended period, then it will be barred by limitation and so be invalid in law. The case of the assessee before the Commissioner (Appeals) was that the assessment made was barred by limitation as it has been made on a date which was not only beyond 31-3-1983 but also beyond the extended period envisaged under clause (iv) of the aforesaid Explanation. The following dates were pointed out by the assessee befo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard the same. It was still lying in his office and he could have recalled it and cancelled it had he wanted to do so. He urged that the process of forwarding begins only when the ITO puts the draft order in the process of transmission in such as way that it is beyond his power to recall it. Such a situation arose only when the draft order left his office on 14-12-1982. Further, he urged that the forwarding never commenced until the contents of the draft order were communicated to the assessee on 16-12-1982. According to him, the forwarding means communicating the order to the assessee and until such communication is done, there is no forwarding at all. In support of this argument, he referred to section 144B (1) of the Act which refers to forwarding of the draft order of the ITO and section 144B (2) which refers to the forwarding by the assessee of his objections. He urged that if the assessee signs the objection and keeps the same inside his drawer for three months, the assessee cannot be said to have forwarded the objections. On the same analogy, he urged that if there is any delay in the office of the ITO in communicating the draft order, though finalised, that delay will not go ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase as it is in accordance with the clear intention of the Legislature. Hence, he urged that in the instant case the date of forwarding of the draft order should be taken as the service on the assessee, i.e., on 16-12-1982 so that the assessment made on 18-8-1983 becomes time barred by five days. He urged that the assessment made by the ITO deserved to be quashed on that ground. 5. Shri A. Singh, the learned representative for the department, on the other hand, supported the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). He stated that the word 'forwards' appearing in sub-clause (iv) of the aforesaid Explanation does not mean 'issues' or 'received'. It is clear that the Legislature has used the words 'issue and 'receive' elsewhere in the Act whenever it wanted to do so. In sub-clause (iv), the Legislature has deliberately used the word 'forward' in contradistinction to the word 'issue' or 'receive'. According to him, the moment the ITO signs the forwarding letter, the process of forwarding begins. He explained that it is but natural for the different sections of the office of the ITO to follow the usual official formalities of entering the document in the issue register and giving to the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the decision in the cases of K. U. Srinivasa Rao and Sheo Kumari Debi applies to the facts of the present case. 6. We have considered the contentions of both the parties as well as the facts on record. The short issue that is raised in this appeal centres round the meaning of the word 'forwards' appearing in clause (iv) of explanation 1 to section 153. In particular, when does this forwarding of the draft order of the ITO begin? Does it begin when the ITO signs the forwarding letter and passes it on to the issue section of his office? Or does it begin when the issue section of his office sends it through post or special messenger for being served on the assessee or does it begin when the said letter is actually served on the assessee? We do no find any direct authority on this point. However, there are several decisions of the Supreme Court which have laid down the guidelines for understanding the meaning of the aforesaid word used in its special context. It is well settle that a provision of an Act has to be interpreted in a way that is workable, not in a way to make it unworkable vide CIT v. S. Teja Singh [1959] 35 ITR 408 (SC). In the case of CED v. Alladi Kuppuswamy [1977] 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of ensuring that the papers proceed on their onward journey till their ultimate destination of reaching the assessee. Thus, the forwarding begins went be papers, duly signed and dated and intended for dispatch to the assessee leave the table of the ITO. The Legislature has clearly intended this event when it has used the word 'forward'. Otherwise, there was no difficulty in using the word 'issue' or 'serve' as has been used at several other places in the Act. The cases relied on by the learned representative for the assessee are distinguishable on facts. The case of Mahabir Prosad Poddar was dealing with an order under section 132(8) against which a representation could be made under section 132(10) and evidently, no representation was possible until the assessee was communicated the order. Besides, the language of section 132(8) does not use the word 'forward'. Similarly, the cases of Bacchittar Singh and Nripendra Nath Majumdar deal with the cases of dismissal of employees and the language of the relevant statutes did not contain the word 'forward'. Hence, these cases are of no use to the assessee. Further, we have noticed that the Legislature has taken care to prescribe a cei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
