9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (6) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mstances, the two appeals are being disposed of, for convenience, by a common order. 2. The assessee is an individual, assessed to Wealth-tax, she maintains accounts and follows the financial year. The valuation dates relevant to her assessment for the asst. yrs. 1971-72 and 1972-73 were respectively 31st march, 1971 and 31st march, 1972. 3. Two sets of wealth-tax returns were filed by the assessee for these two years. The net wealth shown there in and that on which she was assessed are shown below : Asst. yr. Net wealth (in Rs. (lakhs): . . In original return: In revised return: As assessed. 1971-72 1.40 1.93 2.27 1972-73 0. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a hoarding in a specified area of the "Phelps" Bldg. It was a transferable right acquired for a period of six years from the date of the agreement. On8th Jan., 1970the assessee entered into an agreement with "AE", whereby she would allow them to display a hoarding or illuminating sign in the area for which she had obtained the licence from "Phelps". This agreement was to remain in force for a period of five years commencing from8th Jan., 1970. The licence fee was an annual sum of Rs. 7,200 but the entire licence fee payable for the period of five years, amounting to Rs. 36,000 was paid by "AE" to the assessee on8th Jan., 1970itself. The amount received by her was not refundable to the "AE". Clause 9 of the agreement dt.8th Jan., 1970made t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 31-3-1974 7,200 5,400 12,600 Her income-tax assessments covering these accounting periods were all made on the basis of the amount credited by her to the profit and loss account. Similarly, her wealth-tax assessment for the asst. yrs. 1970-71, 1973-74 and 1974-75 were made accepting the amounts credited to the account of "AE" as liabilities. These assessments were made on5th Dec., 1970,14th Dec., 1973and30th July, 1975respectively. The WTO, who made the assessments for the asst. yrs. 1971-72 and 1972-72 on 22nd Dec., 1972, however, held that the assessee had incorrectly claimed the amounts standing to the credit of "AE", at Rs. 27,000 as on 31st March, 1971 and at Rs. 19,800 as on 31st march, 1972, as liabili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... returns filed for the asst. yrs. 1972-73 and 1972-73. Accordingly, the IAC imposed under s. 18(1)(c) r/w Expln. (1) to the said section, a penalty of Rs. 27,000 for the asst. yr. 1971-72 and the WTO also imposed under the said provisions a penalty of Rs. 19,800 for the next year. The IAC s order was dt. 31st march, 1975 while the WTO s was dt.29th March, 1975. The assessee came in appeal to the AAC against the WTO s order in question but her appeal was dismissed, with the observation that the advance rent received from "AE" was the property of the assessee and there was no outstanding liability in this regard. He was of the view that the assessee had deliberately and wilfully attempted to represent the matter in a different manner and that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h, 1975 and imposed the penalty the very same day. He submitted that the penalty for this year was liable to be cancelled on the alternative ground of inadequate opportunity having been given to the assessee for defending herself. 8. The learned Departmental, Representative argued, on the other hand, that nobody knew better than the assessee herself that she had received the entire amount of Rs. 36,000 on 8th Jan., 1970 and, therefore, the amount was includable in her assets to be declared for her wealth-tax assessment. He contended that the assessee had deliberately shown a party of the receipts as liability. In this connection, he relied on the observations of the AAC in respect of the penalty imposed for the asst. yr. 1972-73. As regar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
