9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Appeals against penalties imposed under s. 18(1)(a) of the WT Act for the asst. yrs. 1972-73 and 1973-74 based on the status of the assessee being determined as Individual by the WTO.
Analysis: 1. The WTO determined the assessee's status as Individual for the years 1972-73 and 1973-74, leading to penalties imposed under s. 18(1)(a) based on this status. However, after an appeal for earlier years, the status was corrected to HUF by the WTO. The AAC directed the WTO to recompute penalties considering the corrected status. The WTO also passed an order under s. 35 rectifying the status from Individual to HUF independently of the AAC's order. 2. The assessee contended that penalties imposed in the status of Individual were not sustainable after the status was changed to HUF. Citing decisions from Madras and Allahabad High Courts, it was argued that penalties based on a different status are not legally tenable. The ITAT agreed, noting that penalties imposed under the wrong status are not permissible under the law. Consequently, the penalties were deemed unsustainable, and the appeals were allowed in favor of the assessee. 3. The ITAT did not delve into the plea of reasonable cause as the appeals were already decided in favor of the assessee on the grounds related to the incorrect imposition of penalties based on the Individual status. Therefore, the plea of reasonable cause was considered unnecessary for further examination in this context. 4. Ultimately, both appeals were allowed by the ITAT, ruling in favor of the assessee based on the incorrect imposition of penalties under the status of Individual when the correct status was HUF. The ITAT's decision was influenced by the legal principle that penalties must align with the correct taxpayer status to be considered valid under the law.
|
