9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (1) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... losed her investment with M/s Bhatia Brothers to the extent of Rs. 25,000. After the original assessment had been mad, the WTO made a reassessment and it is stated that the proceedings were opened under s. 17 of the WT Act. The WTO held that the wealth to the extent of Rs. 25,000 having been concealed, penalty under s. 18(1)(c) was leviable. 2. Before the AAC it was pointed that the assessee fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... here was no notice under s. 17 on record and there was no mention of the issue of this notice either on the order-sheet or anywhere else. The WTO only referred to the assessment order where a mention of s. 17 had been made. The WTO had also stated before the AAC that in view of the provisions of s. 42(c) of the IT Act, this error should be ignored and the proceedings should be upheld to be valid. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings and after it is found that the assessment itself was not valid in law, penalty can be cancelled. As there is nothing before us to rebut the finding of the ld. AAC that the proceedings had not been regularised by issue of notice under s.17, we uphold his inference that the assessment made was not in accordance with law. In such circumstances the question of imposing penalty under s. 18 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
