Chapter XIV & Section 139
Return of income
Assessment - Chapter XIV
n ‘Assessment’ in Chapter XIV of the 1961 Act includes a proceeding for imposition of penalty - CIT v. Kirkend Coal Co.  74 ITR 67 (SC).
Every person whose total income during the previous year exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to Income-tax - Sub-section (1)
n The expression ‘every person whose total income during the previous year exceeded the maximum amount which is not chargeable to income-tax’ includes all persons who are liable to pay tax and there is nothing in the section or in its context which exempts non-residents from liability to submit a return pursuant to a notice thereunder - Pannalal Nandlal Bhandari v. CIT  41 ITR 76 (SC).
Time allowed - Sub-section (4)
n The expression ‘time allowed’ in sub-section (4) of section 139 is not confined only to the extension of time granted by the ITO, but also to the time originally fixed for the filing of returns under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 139 - Ganesh Dass Sreeram v. ITO  169 ITR 221/35 Taxman 36A (SC).
At any time - Sub-section (4)
n The phrase ‘at any time’ with regard to the voluntary submissions of returns must mean at any time within the period prescribed by other provisions of the statutes and once the period mentioned in section 149 is over there is an absolute bar to any order of assessment or reassessment unless, of course, it comes within the exceptions - CIT v. Srimati Minabati Agarwalla  79 ITR 278 (Cal.).
Before Assessment is made - Sub-section (4)
n It is correct that as per section 139(4)(a), the time for furnishing return is extended as provided under clause (b), if the return is not furnished within the time allowed under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 139 of the Act and a rider is put by the words “before the assessment is made” but by no stretch of imagination can these words be interpreted to mean that time for filing the return under sub-section (1) or (2) of section 139 of the Act is extended till the assessment order is passed - Parkash Nath v. CIT  225 ITR 305 (HP).