9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment addresses questions of law arising from the Tribunal's common order regarding the assessment years 1956-57, 1957-58, and 1958-59 for the same assessee. Regarding assessment year 1956-57: The first issue was whether the Tribunal had the authority to entertain the assessee's appeal despite no appeal being permissible to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the Income-tax Officer's order under section 46(1) due to non-payment of tax. The second issue was whether the Tribunal was correct in canceling the penalty imposed by the Income-tax Officer under section 46(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Regarding assessment year 1957-58: Similar to the previous year, the first issue was the competence of the Tribunal to entertain the assessee's appeal when no appeal was allowed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the Income-tax Officer's order under section 46(1) due to non-payment of tax. The second issue was whether the Tribunal was justified in canceling the penalty levied by the Income-tax Officer under section 46(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. Regarding assessment year 1958-59: The sole issue was whether the Tribunal was correct in canceling the penalty imposed by the Income-tax Officer under section 221(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal's order mentioned the dismissal of appeals by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for two years due to the tenability of the appeal against the Income-tax Officer's order under section 46(1) not being raised during the Tribunal's proceedings. The Tribunal concluded that the imposition of penalty was not justified based on the assessee's compliance with the Tax Recovery Officer's order to pay tax dues in instalments. The Tribunal considered the discretion of the Income-tax Officer in imposing penalties for default in tax payment, emphasizing that penalties are not automatically applied and depend on the specific circumstances of each case. The Tribunal found that the imposition of penalties was unwarranted given the assessee's adherence to the Tax Recovery Officer's payment instructions. The judgment clarified that the question of the appeal's tenability against the Income-tax Officer's order under section 46(1) did not arise from the Tribunal's order and thus did not require a decision. The only relevant issue remaining was the cancellation of penalties, which the Tribunal was deemed justified in based on the specific circumstances of the case. In conclusion, the reference was answered in favor of the assessee for all three assessment years, stating that the Tribunal's decision to cancel the penalties was justified given the facts and circumstances of the case.
|
