Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1994 (12) TMI 124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... f penalty under s. 18(1)(a) vide order dt. 28th March, 1989 for the past default found in assessment order dt. 3rd Oct., 1984 on wealth assessed therein on the basis of reinitiation of penalty proceedings under s. 18(1)(a) on 24th March, 1987 is erroneous and bad in law as the levy of penalty has already become barred by time limitation. (ii) The direction of learned Dy. CWT(A) to recalculate levy of penalty under s. 18(1)(a) on past default upto 19th Oct., 1983 found in order dt. 3rd Oct., 1984 on wealth assessed therein now is invalid in law. (iii) The learned Dy. CWT(A) has erred in directing to levy penalty under s. 18(1)(a) without approving the reasonable cause for delay in filing the return of wealth within statutory time." 3. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upplementary assessment order dt. 24th March, 1987 will not give fresh limitation to the penalty proceedings for the original default. It was also submitted that as soon as the assessees came to know of their liabilities to wealth-tax they filed returns voluntarily on 19th Oct., 1983 and as such they were prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the returns in time. The Assessing Officer rejected the contentions of the assessees. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessees had revised the returns of wealth on 30th Sept., 1986, i.e., before the date of expiry of limitation for disposal of penalties. The notices under s. 17 were issued and served and reassessments were completed on 24th March, 1987. The reassessment was not suppleme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... additional wealth declared by the assessees under the amnesty scheme. Being dissatisfied, the assessees have come up in second appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The learned counsel for the assessees invited our attention to the reassessment order dt. 24th March, 1987 and submitted that the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under s. 18(1)(a) for original default upto the date of filing the original returns and thus there was no initiation of penalty in respect of the additional wealth declared in the revised returns. According to him, for original default the penalty was initiated in the assessment orders dt. 3rd Oct., 1984 and thus the penalty orders should have been passed before 31st March, 1987. Since the Assessing Officer .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ispute that the returns for all the assessment years filed on 19th Oct., 1983 were late. The only reason for late submission of the returns given before the Assessing Officer was that the returns were filed voluntarily when the assessees came to know of their wealth-tax liabilities. This explanation has been rejected by the Assessing Officer as in his opinion this did not constitute a reasonable cause. No other reason was advanced either before the first appellate authority or before us. We agree with the stand of the Assessing Officer and hold that there was no reasonable cause for non-submission of the returns in time. 10. It is an admitted position that after the completion of the original assessments in the course of which the penalty .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h penalty proceedings have again been started. We, therefore, do not find any substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the assessees that the Assessing Officer ought to have finalised the penalty proceedings before 31st March, 1987 because before that date reassessment proceedings had already commenced. It is nobody's case that the penalty orders are beyond the time limit if reckoned from the initiation of penalty proceedings in reassessments. We have perused the decisions referred to by the learned counsel for the assessees. These decisions do not render any help to them. On the facts already stated and in the given situation, we do not find any infirmity in the orders of the Dy. CWT(A) and accordingly uphold his orders in resp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates