COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. LAXMI METAL INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the Revenue, the Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, has referred the following question of law for the opinion of this Court under S. 256(1) of the IT Act (for short 'the Act') :

(2.) IN the previous year relevant to the asst. year 1977 78 which is in dispute, the assessee claimed a relief of Rs. 34,820 under S. 80J of the Act by filing a revised return. In the initial return which was filed for that year, no such claim was made. The assessee firm had started its business in the previous year relevant to the asst. year 1974 75, but failed to claim deduction under S. 80J. Even during the two subsequent assessment years i.e., 1975 76 and 1976 77 no such claim was made. The ITO was of the view that the assessee's claim ought to have been allowed in the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which industrial undertaking begins to manufacture or produce articles. Since the assessee had failed to make such a claim, the ITO did not entertain the claim under S. 80J. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee took the matter in appeal, before the Asstt. CIT. The appellate authority relying upon a Division Bench decision of this Court in Addl. CIT vs. Sheetalaya 1979 (1) UPTC 1 : (1979) 117 ITR 658 (All) : TC 25R.1163 held that the claim of the assessee under S. 80J should have been entertained and, therefore, he directed the ITO to compute the relief admissible to the assessee under S. 80J and to allow the necessary deduction. On second appeal at the instance of the Revenue, the order passed by the appellate authority was upheld. It is on these facts that the aforesaid question has been referred to this Court for its opinion.

(3.) THE question for consideration is that if the assessee had failed to make a claim in any one of the earlier assessment years comprised in the five years' period, whether the assessee can legally be denied the benefit of S. 80J for the remaining period of five years' term.