SATISH CHANDRA, M. B. FAROOQI
Commissioner of Income-Tax – Appellant
Versus
Tikam Chand Agarwal – Respondent
Satish Chandra, C.J.
1. THIS reference relates to the assessment years 1964-65 and 1967-68. The two questions referred for our opinion are in respect of these years. In substance, the question is whether interest is payable for late filing of the return in spite of service of notice under Section 139(2) of the Act and without application for extension of time and without any order by the ITO extending the time for filing the return. For the assessment year 1964-65, the return was to be filed till September 30, 1964. A notice under Section 139(2) of the Act was served on the assessee on June 1, 1964, calling for a return on or before July 1, 1964. The assessee, however, filed the return on May 21, 1965.
2. FOR the assessment year 1967-68, a notice under Section 139(2) calling for a return to be filed on or before October 3, 1967, was issued on September 4, 1967. The assessee, however, filed the return on February 15, 1969. In both these years, the assessee did not apply to the ITO for extension of time either under Section 139(1) or (2) of the Act. The ITO charged interest for late filing of the return. This view was confirmed on appeal. The assessee took the matter to the Tr
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.