Commissioner of Wealth-tax vs Mehnga Singh

The following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar,

arising out of its order dated August 27, 1990, in W. T. A. Nos. 14 to 20(ASR)/1987 in respect of the assessment years 1967-68 to 1973-74.

Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding that a return filed u/s 15 of the Wealth-tax Act,

1957, could not be subsequently revised in terms of Section 15 itself and consequently holding that the assessment order passed on March 20,

1980, as well as June 30, 1983, by the Wealth-tax Officer as barred by limitation u/s 17A of the Act in respect of the assessment year in dispute?

The facts as noticed by the Tribunal are that the assessee Shri Mehnga Singh, son of Sh. Pakhar Singh, is an individual whose wealth consists of

movable as well as immovable properties. Original returns for the assessment years under consideration were filed on February 28, 1974, which

were subsequently revised by furnishing returns for all the years on March 28, 1979. The assessments for all the assessment years were completed

u/s 16(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (for short, ""the Act""), on March 20, 1980, i.e., within one year of the filing of the revised returns. The

assessee went in appeal and the assessments were set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer. Fresh assessments were made by the Wealth-tax

Officer on June 30, 1983, which were objected to by the assessee by filing the appeals before the learned Appellate Assistant Commissioner,

Jalandhar, who vide his consolidated order dated March 27, 1986, quashed the assessments being barred by limitation. The Department filed

appeals against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner before the Tribunal and the Tribunal dismissed the appeals of the Department

vide its consolidated order dated August 27, 1990.

The Revenue sought reference of a question of law arising therefrom for the reason that there were different opinions of various High Courts on

the issue as to whether a belated return could be revised or not and the revised return so filed could be dealt with by the Assessing Officer or not.

The opinion on the one side being by the Delhi High court in O.P. Malhotra Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, the Allahabad High Court in

Dr. S.B. Bhargava Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, , the Rajasthan High Court in Vimalchand Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, and the Kerala

High Court in Eapen Joseph v. CIT [1987] 168 ITR 26. The above judgments were taking the view that a belated return filed could not be revised

and consequently the same being invalid could not have been treated and acted upon as revised return. The view on the other side was by the

Calcutta High Court in Kumar Jagadish Chandra Sinha Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, and Balish Singh and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income

Tax, by the Madras High court in Nanjappa Textiles and Others Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, .

The question was referred to this Court for opinion for the reason that there were divergent of opinions of different High Courts on the issue of

there being no judgment of the hon''ble Supreme Court or the jurisdictional High Court at the relevant time.

Learned Counsel for the Revenue could not dispute that the issue has been gone into by the hon''ble Supreme Court in Kumar Jagdish Chandra

Sinha (dead) Through LRs. etc. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal, .

After examining the issue in detail under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, which are similar to the provisions under consideration under the

Act, views taken by the Delhi High Court in O.P. Malhotra Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, , the Allahabad High Court in Dr. S.B.

Bhargava Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, , the Rajasthan High Court in Vimalchand Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, and the Kerala High

Court in Eapen Joseph v. CIT [1987] 168 ITR 26 were approved whereas the view taken by the Calcutta High court in Kumar Jagadish Chandra

Sinha Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, , was reversed and it was held that a belated return filed u/s 139(4) of the Act could not be revised and

the revised returns filed being invalid in law could not have been acted upon.

The judgment of the hon''ble Supreme Court in Kumar Jagdish Chandra Sinha (dead) Through LRs. etc. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax,

West Bengal, was followed by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Smt. Jyoti Dhillon, and by the Delhi High Court in Suram Chand

Rahlan Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, . The facts of the present case, being not in dispute that the assessee filed belated returns for the

assessment years 1967-68 to 1973-74 u/s 15 of the Act on February 28, 1974, in terms of the law laid down by the hon''ble Supreme Court in

Kumar Jagdish Chandra Sinha (dead) Through LRs. etc. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, West Bengal, the same could not be revised and

consequently acted upon. Accordingly, the question of law referred to this Court is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee.