9911796707
TMI Blog1977 (1) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 67-68 to 1970-71 were completed on the basis of the returns filed on 20th May, 1972 on the legal heir of the deceased assessee. For the asst. yr. 1971-72, the assessment was similarly completed on 21st April, 1972. The WTO initiated penalty proceedings for the delay in filing the returns. Observing that there was no response and assuming that there has been on proper explanation to officer, the WTO imposed penalties under s. 18(1)(a) of the WT Act. The details of the net wealth assessed and the penalties levied are as under: Asst. yr. Net wealth assessed. Penalty levied. 1967-68 Rs. 1,59,221 Rs. 20,409 1968-69 Rs. 1,99,774 Rs. 24,041 1969-70 Rs. 1,94,782 Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y against Smt. Anandavalli, the legal hair of the late Shri P. Govindaswami was in contravention of the Act and hence void. Aggrieved by the said consolidated order of the AAC, the Revenue has filed these appeals before us. 3. The learned Departmental Representative contended that the AAC erred in cancelling the penalties levied under s. 18(1)(a) of the WT Act on the legal representative. He pointed out that the provisions of the s. 19 of the WT Act are wide enough to cover liabilities to penalties on the legal representatives. He therefore, urged that the orders of the WTO should be restored. 4. On behalf of the assessee, reliance was placed on the order of the AAC. It was further stressed that the returns were filed voluntarily. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and not to his legal representative. There is nothing in s. 18 to indicate that a person other than the assessee will be liable for penalty in case of contravention of any of the provisions thereof. That is evident from a reading of sub-ss. (1) and (3) of s. 19 which lay down: 19.(1) Where a person dies, his executor, administrator or other legal representative shall be liable to pay out of the estate of the deceased person, to the extent to which the estate is capable of meeting the charge, the wealth-tax assessed as payable by such person, or any sum, which would have been payable by him under this At if he had not died (3) The provisions of s. 14, 15 and 17 shall apply to an executor, administrator or other legal representative ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ided in the Act. Originally, even in the IT Act, there was no such provision. It was only after the decision in CIT vs. Ellis C. Reid that the IT Act was amended, so as to make the legal representatives of an assessee liable to pay the tax due by the assessee. I do not think, therefore, the Department is right in imposing a penalty of Rs. 10,000 on the legal representatives of Thularunai Co. which was originally run by the father as a sole proprietorship concern". The B Bench of the Tribunal to which one of us was a party (Accountant-Member), in WTA Nos. 391 to 393/72-73 by order dt. 28th June, 1965, took the same view as above. Respectfully following the above ruling, we uphold the order of the AAC in respect of asst. yrs. 1967-68 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds that the returns for all the years, including this year, were filed voluntarily. Having regard to the helpless situation in which the legal representative was placed as a result of the sudden demise of her husband and the other circumstances as set out above we are of the view that the delay of six months in filing the return by her cannot be said to be without reasonable cause. it is now well settled that penalty for non-compliance with statutory obligations is not imposable automatically on default. It has to be established that the assessee is guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest or of acting in deliberate disregard of the provisions of law, before imposing penalty. Further the question whether penalty. Further question whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
