9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (10) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under s. 18(2A) of the Act. Thus it was submitted that no appeal would lie against the orders of the Wealth-tax Officer before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and for the same reasons no appeal would lie before the Tribunal. 2. The Judicial Member was of the view that appeal would lie against the orders of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. He also held on merit that no penalty under s. 18(1)(c) is leviable and consequently the impugned orders of penalty were cancelled. 3. The learned Accountant Member was of the view that no appeal would lie against the order of the Wealth-tax Officer before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and as such no appeal would lie before the Tribunal against the orders of the Appellate Assistant Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ealth-tax Officer were really orders passed under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act and the same were not only to give effect to the order of the Commissioner of Wealth-tax passed under s. 18(2A) of the Act. 5. The learned third Member also pointed out that the learned Accountant member did not decide the appeals on merit. Accordingly, the appeals were fixed for hearing. After hearing the parties, the learned Accountant Member passed order on merit in all the appeals on 12th Oct., 1977. He agreed with the finding of the Judicial Member that no penalty is leviable against the assessee in respect of the assessment year under consideration under s. 18(1)(c) of the Act. 6. Accordingly, all the appeals are allowed. The impugned orders of penalty are ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n below that these cases were not fit for the levy of penalties under s. 18(1)(c): (i) The wealth-tax assessments in these cases had been completed on 31st March, 1971. The assessee voluntarily filed returns showing therein the value of the assets that had not been disclosed in the original returns before detection of the said omissions by the Department. (ii) One of the assets which had not been disclosed is deposits with M/s. Faquirchand Ramlal, Sgnr. The assessees had been partners in this firm in the earlier year. The firm had dissolved on 31st March, 1970 which is the valuation date for the concerned assessment year. Since the firm had ceased to exist on the said valuation date, the deposits in question had escaped the assessee s n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
