9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Notice under section 274 read with section 271 of the Income-tax Act for failure to furnish return on time, application for extension of time, charging of penal interest, initiation of penalty proceedings, interpretation of relevant sections, applicability of penalty in case of interest charged. Analysis: The case involved a partnership firm challenging a notice under section 274 read with section 271 of the Income-tax Act for failing to furnish the return on time. The firm applied for registration, which was denied, and appealed against the decision. The total income was assessed, rectified, and penal interest was charged for late filing. The respondent argued that interest was a liability, not penal, and penalty proceedings were justified. The petitioner contended that filing the return before assessment completion should not attract penalty. The court examined the provisions of section 139 and its relation to penalty proceedings under section 271. The petitioner argued that filing the return before assessment completion should not lead to penalty proceedings, citing similar provisions in the old Act. However, the court held that penalty proceedings can be initiated if the return is not filed within the time allowed by the Income-tax Officer. The court differentiated between interest charged under section 139 and penalties under section 271, emphasizing that failure to file the return within the extended time allows penalty initiation. The court referred to previous cases to support its interpretation, emphasizing that penalty proceedings can be initiated if the return is not filed within the time granted by the Income-tax Officer. The court clarified that interest charged under section 139 is a statutory liability, not penal in nature, and does not preclude penalty proceedings under section 271. The court upheld the validity of the notice under section 271, ruling that it was not without jurisdiction. In conclusion, the court discharged the rule, vacated interim orders, and made no order as to costs. The judgment clarified the distinction between interest charged under section 139 and penalties under section 271, affirming the validity of penalty proceedings in cases of late filing despite interest charges.
|
