Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

5. We have heard the ld. Representatives of the parties. The issue to be examined in this case is whether the order of CIT(A) quashing A.O.'s order is in accordance with law. Before coming to the issue, it is relevant to note the important facts of the case that the so-called revised return filed on 29.12.2008 which is not a valid return of income. The revised return can be filed under section 139(5). Section 139(5) provides that if any person having furnished a return under sub-section (1) of section 139 of the Act or in pursuance of notice issued under sub-section (1) of section 142 discovers any omission or wrong statement therein he may furnish a revised return of any time before expiry of one year from the end of the relevant A.Y. or before the completion of assessment whichever is earlier. In the case under consideration, one year from the end of the Assessment Year has been expired on 31.03.2005. The original return filed was processed on 25.11.2003. The assessee has filed the so-called revised return on 29.12.2008 surrendering the amount surrendered at the time of survey. Thus, the so-called revised return was filed after the prescribed period under section 139(5).

A.Y. 2003-04 Therefore, in the eyes of law the so-called revised return filed by the assessee on 29.1.2008 is not a valid revised return. It is also admitted fact that after the issue of notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee did not file any return or made submission that the original return filed may be treated as return filed against the notice under section 148 of the Act. Further no notice under section 142(1) of the Act issued by the A.O. for furnishing return of income.

8. On perusal of section 148(1) along with section 143(2) of the Act, we notice that before making assessment under section 147 of the Act the A.O. is to serve notice under section 148 of the Act requiring the assessee to furnish the return of income. On furnishing return of income in compliance to notice under section 148 of the Act then the provisions of this Act including issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act shall apply accordingly. If we see the objects of issuing notice under section 143(2) after filing return of income, we noticed that notice is required to be issued to examine and to ensure that the assessee has not understated the income or has not computed excessive loss or has not under-paid the tax in any manner. For this purpose opportunity is required to be given to the assessee to produce or to be produced any evidence on which the assessee may rely in support of the return. When the assessee has chosen not to file return, we are of the considered view that no notice under section 143(2) is required to be served. In the case under consideration, as stated above, it is admitted fact that the assessee did A.Y. 2003-04 not furnish return in compliance to notice under section 148 of the Act nor it was stated that the original return filed be taken as return in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. In the case under consideration, the so-called revised return has been filed on 29.12.2008 which is not a valid revised return in the eyes of law but at the most that may be information for the basis of issue of notice under section 148 of the Act. Since no valid return is filed under section 148, 139 or 142, therefore, period of issue of notice under section 143(2) as per proviso to section 143(2) cannot be counted which is to be reckoned from furnishing of return. We accordingly hold that there is no return filed in compliance to notice under section 148 of the Act, therefore, the issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act is not a mandatory requirement.