COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. BEZBARUA K C

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the CIT, the following question lf law has been referred to us by the Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Guwahati, for our opinion :

(2.) THE assessee is an individual. The assessment year is 1976 -77. The assessee submitted his return of income on 19th Feb., 1979. The assessment was completed under S. 143(3) on a net loss of Rs. 35,380. The ITO, however, did not allow the loss to be carried forward on the ground that the return was not filed within the time prescribed under S. 139(3) of the INCOME TAX ACT, 1961, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The assessee filed an appeal before the AAC which was rejected. The assessee filed second appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal decided in favour of the assessee. It held that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of carry forward of the loss sustained in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT vs. Kulu Valley Transport Co. (P) Ltd. (1970) 77 ITR 518 (SC) : TC46R.353. The contention of the Revenue that this decision of the Supreme Court being a decision under the Indian IT Act, 1922 ('1922 Act' hereinafter) will not apply to a case under the IT Act, 1961 ('1961 Act') was repelled by the Tribunal on the ground that there was no substantial difference between the relevant provisions of the 1922 Act and the 1961 Act in this regard. The CIT applied under S. 256(1) of the Act for reference and, at his instance, the aforesaid question has been referred by the Tribunal.

(3.) MR . D.N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, submits that there is no substantial difference in the language of the relevant provisions under the two Acts and the ratio of the decision of Kulu Valley (supra) squarely applies to a case under the 1961 Act.