High Court Of Madhya Pradesh : Indore Bench
CIT vs. Ashok Kumar Jain
Section 153(2)
Asst. Year 1982-83
A.M. Sapre & Ashok Kumar Tiwari, JJ.
Misc. Civil Case No. 18 of 1992
13th August, 2004
Counsel Appeared
R.L. Jain, for the Revenue : None, for the Assessee
ORDER
A.M. sapre, J. :
This is an IT reference made under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, at the instance of the CIT by the Tribunal to answer the following question of law:
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessment made under s. 143(3) r/w s. 143(2)(b) of the IT Act, 1961, was barred by limitation in view of s. 153(2) when the return was filed in response to notice under s. 148 served on 29th Sept., 1983 ?”
As is clear from the question quoted supra, a short question in substance that arises for consideration in this reference is whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessment made and completed by the AO on 25th March, 1988, in the asst. yr. 1982-83 in pursuance of a notice issued under s. 148 of the IT Act is within limitation or barred by limitation ? The Tribunal by placing reliance on s. 153 of the Act held that it is barred and accordingly decided the case in favour of the assessee, giving rise to this reference at the instance of the CIT to this Court. Heard Shri R.L. Jain, learned counsel for the CIT, Bhopal. None present for the assessee despite service. Having heard learned counsel for the Revenue and having perused the statement of the case and the relevant orders forming part of the case, we are of the opinion that the question referred has to be answered in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
It is not in dispute that the assessment in question was the outcome of the notice issued by the Department to the assessee under s. 148 of the IT Act. This notice was served upon the assessee on 29th Sept., 1983, as stated in the statement of case pursuant to which the assessee filed the return on 28th March, 1985. The AO then completed the assessment on 25th March, 1988. Sec. 153(2) of the Act, as it then stood at the time of issuance of s. 148 notice and consequent upon its completion of assessment, provided limitation of four years from the end of the assessment year in which notice under s. 148 was served. In this case s. 148 notice was served upon the assessee on 29th Sept., 1983. So, the end of the assessment year was 31st March, 1984, for the purpose of calculating four years from that date. Four years period as prescribed under s. 153(2) would thus expire on 31st March, 1988. As taken note of supra, the assessment in question was completed on 25th March, 1988, i.e., well within four years as per requirement of s. 153(2) which had application to this case at the relevant time. These dates are taken by this Court from the statement of case referred by the Tribunal for answer. The assessment was thus made within limitation and the same was in conformity with the requirement of s. 153(2) of the Act. Under these circumstances and in this view of the matter, we are not inclined to subscribe to the view taken by the Tribunal when it held assessment to be barred. We, however, hold that the assessment in question for the year 1982-83 made pursuant to s. 148 notice was within limitation and it be given effect to. Accordingly and in view of the aforesaid discussion, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. No costs.
[Citation : 271 ITR 77]
