9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (11) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tive and have perused the material placed before us. 3. The proceedings relate to asst. yr. 1969-70, the valuation date for which was20th Oct., 1968. The return was due to be filed bythe 30th June, 1969but on an application moved on behalf of the assessee the time was extended upto31st Oct., 1969. No return was, however filed and ultimately after the promulgation of the Voluntary Disclosure Sche ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is return voluntarily in terms of s. 7(1)(a) of the said Ordinance which was replaced by Act No. 8 of 1976, no penalty under s. 18(1)(a) was leviable. The learned Departmental Representative conceded the legal position that if the return was filed voluntarily under the aforesaid Disclosure Scheme and if no notice was served on the assessee under s. 14(2) earlier, no penalty is leviable. As regards ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Dec., 1975. 5. As regards the issue of a notice under s. 14(2), the AAC has observed that there was no direct evidence on record about the issue or the service of the notice. The learned Departmental Representative, who had the assessment records with him conceded that the is observation of the AAC was factually correct. We also looked into the order sheet, a copy of which has been placed in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at to say of the service thereof on the assessee. The conduct of the WTO also negatives the issue or the service of a notice. It is incomprehensible that a WTO after having issued notice under s. 14(2) of the Act would take no action whatsoever for as long a period as 6 1/2 years. We, therefore, hold that no notice under s. 14(2) of the WT Act was ever served on the assessee and, therefore the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
