9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether penalty was leviable under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957? 2. Whether the penalty imposed was beyond jurisdiction? Analysis: The case involves a reference under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, with two questions referred to the court for opinion. The first issue was whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that penalty was leviable under section 18(1)(a) of the Act. The assessee failed to file a return of net wealth by the due date, leading to a penalty imposition by the Wealth-tax Officer. The assessee argued that there was a reasonable cause for the delay in filing the return, primarily due to waiting for the balance-sheet of a company in which most assets were held. However, both the Wealth-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner found no reasonable cause for the delay, leading to the conclusion that penalty was justifiable. The Appellate Tribunal also concurred that there was no satisfactory explanation for the delay, establishing a factual basis for the penalty under section 18(1)(a). The court upheld the Tribunal's decision on this issue. Moving to the second question, the issue was whether the penalty amount imposed was within jurisdiction. The assessee contended that if a penalty was to be levied, it should only be for one month instead of two. However, since it was established that there was no reasonable cause for the delay in filing the return by the due date, the penalty for two months was deemed appropriate. The court found no merit in the assessee's argument and upheld the penalty amount of Rs. 4,644 for the two months of default. Both questions were answered in favor of the Department, indicating that the penalty imposition was justified based on the facts and circumstances of the case. No costs were awarded in the case.
|
