Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Wealth-tax Wealth-tax + HC Wealth-tax - 1990 (8) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1990 (8) TMI 110 - HC - Wealth-tax

Issues:
1. Application for waiver of penalties under section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957.
2. Commissioner's discretion in granting waiver of penalties based on good faith.
3. Interpretation of the provision of section 18B regarding repeated defaults in filing returns.

Analysis:
The High Court of Allahabad heard a writ petition challenging the Commissioner of Wealth-tax's order dismissing the petitioner's application for waiver of penalties under section 18B of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957. The petitioner had filed wealth-tax returns for multiple assessment years on different dates. The Commissioner waived penalties for some years but not for others, citing lack of good faith due to the repeated defaults in filing returns. The Commissioner's reasoning emphasized that the provision of section 18B allows for a one-time waiver for voluntary disclosure of concealed income/wealth, not for repeated defaults over several years. The court disagreed with the Commissioner's reasoning, stating that good faith is a factual matter, not a legal one. The court found no legal impediment to the petitioner making a single application for waiver for all years, as it was one explanation for the entire period. The court highlighted that the obligation to file returns applies annually to individuals exceeding the taxable limit, and the distinction made by the Commissioner was not entirely justified as a legal principle. The court concluded that the matter required reconsideration by the Commissioner.

Therefore, the court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the Commissioner's order concerning the assessment years 1978-79 to 1982-83. The case was remanded to the Commissioner for reconsideration and proper disposal according to law, with no costs imposed.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates