Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.72 seconds)
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, A.P. vs Ashoka Engineering Co., Grafik India ... on 17 January, 1992 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Nagarmal Bisheshar Lal on 16 October, 1990

5. The two points of view urged before us are these : On behalf of the Department, Sh. Ahuja contends that an application for registration or a declaration filed beyond the due date is no application or declaration in the eye of law and that the consequence is that such an application or declaration cannot at all be entertained by the Income-tax Officer unless he is satisfied that there exists some sufficient cause for the delay. On the other hand, the other point of view is that the provision in Section 185(2) & (3) is sufficiently wide to take in these cases as a delayed application can be said to be an application not in order because they have not been filed within the stipulated time. In such cases, like any other defect this defect also should be brought to the notice of the assessee and, if he does not rectify the defect, the Income-tax Officer has to pass an order rejecting the application. In other words, the contention is that even a delayed application is a defective application and, when this is not entertained as Sh. Ahuja contends, what really happens is that the Income-tax Officer rejects the application as not being in order. This point of view has been accepted in a large number of decisions which are referred in the latest of these cases which is reported as Commr. of Income-tax v. Nagarmal Bisheshar Lal .
Allahabad High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 7 - B P Reddy - Full Document
1