Madhya Pradesh H.C : Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the reference made by the ITO to the IAC under s. 144B was valid and the assessment made by the ITO on 23rd April, 1979, was within the period of limitation ?

Counsel Appeared

B.L. Nema, for the Assessee : B.K. Rawat, for the Revenue

N.D. OJHA, C.J.:

The Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has referred the following question to this Court for its opinion under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) :

“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the reference made by the ITO to the IAC under s. 144B was valid and the assessment made by the ITO on 23rd April, 1979, was within the period of limitation ?”

The facts in brief necessary to answer the aforesaid question are that even though proceedings for the asst. yr. 1978-79 (sic) against the assessee should have been completed by 31st March, 1979, they were actually completed by the ITO on 23rd April, 1979, after a reference to the IAC under s. 144B of the Act. It has not been disputed that if the reference under s. 144B of the Act was proper, then the assessment, as made on 23rd April, 1979, would be within limitation. What has, however, been urged is that the addition made to the income of the assessee by the ITO was actually less than Rs. one lakh, but was erroneously shown to be more than that figure and, consequently, the reference itself was not proper. This being so, the assessment made on 23rd April, 1979, was barred by time. The plea raised in this behalf on behalf of the assessee, however, did not find favour with the Tribunal in its second appellate order. The Tribunal has accepted the case of the Department that the ITO, while preparing the draft, had made a bona fide mistake in calculation.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the aforesaid finding recorded by the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact and, on that finding, it cannot be said that the reference made under s. 144B of the Act by the ITO was improper. We accordingly find no good ground for holding that the finding of the Tribunal that the assessment was not barred by time is invalid.

In the result, our answer to the question referred to us is that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the reference made by the ITO to the IAC under s. 144B was valid and the assessment made by the ITO on 23rd April, 1979, was within the period of limitation. In other words, the question referred to us is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the Department and against the assessee. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.

[Citation : 170 ITR 459]