9911796707
TMI Blog1975 (10) TMI 41X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, 1961 were started. 2. In penalty proceedings on behalf of the assessee it was explained that the income of the assessee is subject to tax deducted at source under s. 195 of the Act and as such no penalty may be imposed. It was also submitted that the assessee has filed appeal before the AAC and in appeal the assessee expects some relief. It was also contended that there was no income to the assessee in the year of account and as such no penalty may be imposed. The learned ITO was of view that the assessment was completed on a figure of Rs. 3,28,077 as such it was incorrect to say that there was no income to the assessee. The learned ITO was of the view that there was a delay of twelve months in filing the return. He also found that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble cause which prevented the assessee from filing the return in time. Thus it was contended that the penalty of Rs. 309 may be imposed and in any view of the matter penalty of Rs. 25 in view of s. 271(3) of the Act may be imposed. 5. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that in the present case no penalty is leviable. Accordingly to the books of account maintained by the assessee there was loss of Rs. 2,41,207 and as such the assessee was not under any obligation to file the return either under s. 139(1) or under s. 139(2) of the Act. It was further contended that the learned ITO computed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 3,28,077 and the assessment was completed accordingly. In appeal the learned AAC gave relief of Rs. 3, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1(3)(b) would not be applicable. That section reads as under:-- "Where a person has failed to comply with a notice under sub-s. (2) of the s. 139 or s. 148 and proves that he was no income liable to tax the penalty imposable under sub-s. (1) shall not exceed twenty-five rupees." In the present case there is income to the extent of Rs. 883 so this provision is not applicable. 7. The assessee gave explanation before the authorities below that according to the books maintained by it, there was loss of Rs. 2,41,207, and as such the assessee was not under any obligation to file the return either under s. 139(1) or under s. 139(2) of the Act. The assessee did file the return in pursuance of notice under s. 139(2) but there was a delay of 12 mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
