9911796707
TMI Blog1981 (3) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erned with one of them. 2. 1971-72 is the assessment year concerned. Return of net wealth for the said asst. yr. was under s. 14(1) due to be filed by30th June, 1971. It was instead filed on6th Dec., 1971, i.e. after a delay of 5 complete months. After completion of assessment, the WTO initiated against the assessee proceedings for penalty for delay in filing the return of net wealth. The assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat as on31st March, 1969the assessee had returned taxable netwealths for asst. yrs. 1966-67 to 1968-69. Thus, the assessee could be presumed to be aware of the provisions of s. 14(1), WT Act. Still it is difficult for us to hold that the Department discharged in the instant case the initial onus that lay on it in cases like the instant one as pointed out in Addl. CIT vs. I.M. Patel Co. (1977) 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... known on30th June, 1971that he owned net wealth which was taxable. We are not inclined to agree. Revised return was filed some 3 years and 8 months after the filing of the original return and assessee's suggestion in that connection is that the revised return was filed only with the view that assessee might not have to face unnecessary proceedings to penalty for concealment on basis of lower estim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
