Log In

| Recover password



In a case before Kerala High Court in CIT v. Masoneilan (India) Ltd. (107TAX559) the return was not signed by the person specified u/s 140. The assessing officer issued a notice u/s 154 to the assessee proposing to treat such return as non est and void ab initio.  The assessee filed its objection stating that a person who was authorized to do so on the basis of a power of attorney filed return. On this issue the Court held that in the case of a company return is to be signed and verified by the Managing Director or a director and nobody else.   The Court held that absence of proper signature or verification is however a curable one and the assessee must have an opportunity to rectify it. The Court for this purpose made reference to the provisions section 292B and section 139(8) desiring that the assessing officer is duty bound to give an opportunity to the assessee to rectify the defect within the stipulated time. On the question of application of section 154 the Court held that it is a case of lack of something necessary for completeness or perfection where section 292B or section 139(8) come into place and not section 154.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

error: Do not copy the content of this website.