COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. DAHYABHAI PARSHOTTAMDAS PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal has referred the following three questions to this Court under S. 256(1) of the IT Act :

(2.) THE assessee firm has been carrying on business since 1969 70. It applied for registration for the asst. year 1972 73 during the relevant year, but the registration was granted on 24th Feb., 1975. For the asst. year 1973 74, the assessee ought to have filed its return on 30th June, 1973 and along with the return, the assessee ought to have filed a declaration in Form No. 12. What the assessee did was to file the declaration on 30th June, 1974, but the return of income came to be filed on 27th Sept., 1975, that is, after the registration was granted. The declaration which was filed for the asst. year 1972 73 was signed by one of the partners Dahyabhai Purshottamdas Patel who had died on 20th Feb., 1973.

(3.) THE assessee then preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. After considering the explanation of the assessee, the Tribunal was of the view that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing a valid declaration within time and, therefore, there was good case for condonation of delay. Thus, the finding recorded by the AAC was confirmed by the Tribunal. As regards validity of the form, the Tribunal held that the assessee was under a mistaken belief that even after the death of the partner, Form No. 12 filled in by him during his lifetime could be produced after putting the date of filing thereon. Thus, the Tribunal considered the declaration as valid and allowed the appeal directing the authorities below to treat the firm as a registered firm for the assessment year.