ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. DONGARSIDAS BIHARILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the Additional CIT, Bihar, Patna, the Patna Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the under-mentioned question under Section 256(1) of the I. T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), for the opinion of this court:

(2.) THIS question is common to all the four tax references. The facts are also common. THIS judgment will, therefore, govern all the four cases.

(3.) ON further appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal, the penalties imposed for the respective years were deleted on the ground that since the assessee had filed the returns of income for the respective years under Section 139{4) of the Act, which was one of the modes prescribed in the Act for filing return of total income, the assessee could not be penalised for not filing the returns of income under Section 139(1) of the Act. The Tribunal relied upon its decision in the case of S. S. Mukherjee & Co. (I.T.A. No. 650 Patna of 1969), in which it had observed that under Section 139 of the Act there are three modes for filing return of income, namely, under Section 139(1), under Section 139(2) and Section 139{4) of the Act. A return of income filed within the time prescribed for filing it either under Section 139(1) or under Section 139(2) or under Section 139(4) was a proper return. A person could not file his return of income more than once. If, therefore, a person has filed his return of income in accordance with either of the three specified modes, he will be deemed to have filed a valid return of income absolving him of the default in filing return of income. The provisions of Section 271(1)(a) would not then apply to such a case.