9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he was required to show cause way the penalty should not be imposed. In reply to show cause notice served on the assessee, appearance was put in on its behalf before the ITO and it was stated that the assessee had applied for extension of time in Form No. 6 on 31st July 1976 and 29th Sept., 1976. The ground for delay was stated to be the Accountant s illness. The ITO found that there was a delay for eight months in the submission of the return, and that such a long delay could not be attributed to the Accountant s illness. It was also noticed that no fresh application for extension of time was moved after 29th Sept. 1976. The ITO was of opinion that on the ground of Accountant s illness the reasonable time for extension cannot be accepted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eeking extension of time was made on 31st July 1976, and that the second application seeking further extension of time for a period of 6 months was made on 29th Sept., 1976. These facts are also borne out from the paper book filed on behalf of the Revenue. The application moved on behalf of the assessee before the ITO on receiving the notice appears at page 3 of the paperbook which mentioned the aforesaid facts. The ld. Departmental Represenative while pressing the appeal urged that under the second application moved in Form No. 6 the assessee sought extenuation of time upto 31st March, 1977 and that thereafter no fresh application was moved which was indicative of the fact that, at any rate, the assessee head no reasonable cause for delaye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Form No. 6 seeking extension of time were not disallowed, the assessee was under the impression that time prayed for therein had been grantee by the ITO. it was thus urged that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the penalty imposed upon the assessee was rightly cancelled by the lower appellate authority. 6. In reply, the ld. Departmental Represenative contended that the application Form No. 6 should have been made with reference to s. 139 (2) of the IT Act. 7. We have considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties and have also gone though the materials placed before us as well as the authorities cited on behalf of the Revenue. It is true that the burden to prove that there was reasonable cause for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 29th April, 1977. A Photostat copy of the acknowledgement slip issued to the assessee by the ITO further goes to show that the return of income for the assessment year under consideration was filed by the assessee on 29th April, 1977. So it cannot be doubted even for a moment that the return of income was, in fact filed on 29th April, 1976, and not on 29th Sept., 1976, as mentioned in the appellate order of the AAC. As has already been mentioned above, it was pointed out before us on behalf of the assessee that its headquarters are at Gauhati, but the work site where the contract work had to be executed lay at a distance of 80/100 miles away from Gauhati, and that for this reason compilation of accounts took time. It was also pointed ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
