9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (4) TMI 164X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 72-73. 2. The wealth-tax return was due on or before 31st July, 72. It was actually filed on 13th Oct., 72 so that there was delay of 2 complete months. In view of this default the WTO imposed the impugned penalty of Rs.4,441. 3. The assessee appealed to the AAC. It was pointed out to the learned AAC that the assessee had made applications for extension of time twice. The first application was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nted out that the firm M/s. Periwal Ice Ginning and Pressing Factory in which the assessee was a partner filed its own return on 9th Oct., 72 and the assessee filed her wealth-tax return on 13th Oct., 72. Proceeding further it was stated that the default, if at all it was there, was technical or venial and there was no deliberate defiance of the law or contumacious or dishonest conduct on the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed for extension of time twice. Before the AAC evidence was produced for filing the same. The assessee was also handicapped by non-receipt of her capital account from the firm in which she was a partner and also by non-receipt of the balance-sheets of the companies of which she was the share holder. These were required for determining the market value of the shares as per rr. 1C and 1D of the WT R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
