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 Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 1978 (12) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1978 (12) TMI 33 - HC - Income Tax


Issues:
1. Application of amended provisions of section 275 for penalty proceedings.
2. Justification of penalty under sections 271(1)(a) and 273(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. The judgment addressed the application of amended provisions of section 275 for penalty proceedings. The court noted that the amendment changed the period of limitation for initiating penalty proceedings to two years commencing from the end of the financial year in which the assessment order was passed. The court referred to precedents from Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, and Orissa High Courts to support the retrospective application of the amendment to pending matters. In this case, the assessment orders were passed in August 1969, making the amended period of limitation applicable until March 31, 1972. The court agreed with the authorities cited, establishing the applicability of the amended provision in this case.

2. The judgment also deliberated on the justification of penalty under sections 271(1)(a) and 273(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee had applied for waiver or reduction of the imposable penalty before the Commissioner under s. 271(4A) for delay in filing the return, which the Commissioner had jurisdiction to consider. However, s. 271(4A) did not apply to penalty imposition under s. 273(b) for not filing the estimate. Despite being an advocate, the assessee did not provide any explanation for the delay or non-filing of the estimate during the penalty proceedings. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) adjourned the proceedings twice but eventually passed penalty orders on the same day as the last adjournment due to the impending limitation deadline. The court concurred with the Tribunal's view that the assessee was given a reasonable opportunity to show cause, considering the lack of explanation provided by the assessee and the circumstances of the case.

In conclusion, the court answered both questions in favor of the department and against the assessee, upholding the imposition of penalties. The Commissioner was awarded costs amounting to Rs. 200.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates