9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (3) TMI 225X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m. It had entered into contracts with the Executive Engineer of the State Government for sinking borewells in various places. The Commissioner of Income-tax noted that for the assessment year 1980-81, the total receipts from such contracts was Rs. 20,35,689 and for the assessment year 1981-82 Rs. 7,22,766 but the assessee had not filed the requisite particulars in Form No. 52 as required by sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23 ITR 573 referred to by the CIT, this was not a fit case for imposition of penalty. On the other hand, the Revenue supported the order of the CIT. 4. On a consideration of the facts of the case, we are of the opinion that these are not fit cases for imposition of penalty at all. Section 285A(1) requires the furnishing of particulars only in respect of contracts for carrying out any work the va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use for not furnishing the required particulars. 5. There is another aspect to this case. The contracts were taken in the previous years ended 31-3-1980 and 31-3-1981. The assessment had been completed by 1983. Thereafter the assessee had voluntarily filed Form No. 52 on 11-2-1986. It was subsequently on 2-6-1986 that on the basis of the information filed by the assessee the Commissioner of Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vention continues." This indicates that this section has been devised for compelling the filing of a form and not for penalizing a default after the form is actually filed. The picture that emerges is that even if the failure to file the form originally were to be taken as a technical default, it was entirely venial and did not attract the provisions of the section. Hence we are convinced that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
