Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1976 (4) TMI 125

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed. The AAC found force in the contention of the assessee that there was no valid order in the eye of law levying the penalty. The other contention raised by the assessee was that the successor ITO had not issued another show cause notice before imposing the penalty. The AAC found force in this contention of the assessee also and he observed that the assessee thus was not given a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the penalty was levied by the successor ITO. He accordingly cancelled the penalty of Rs. 1,000 levied by the ITO under s. 140A(3). The Department is in appeal before us against the said action of the AAC. 2. The learned Departmental Representative stated that a copy of the show cause notice issued in this regard and du .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for that year. The entry in the order sheet may also indicate the directions for the issuance of a notice or may record the presence of an assessee or its representative on a particular date. The entry in the order sheet however could not amount to the marking of a regular or a formal order under the Act. The provisions of s. 156 require that when any tax, interest, penalty, fine or any other sum was payable in consequence of an order passed under the IT Act, the ITO shall serve on the assessee a notice of demand in the prescribed from specifying the sum so payable. In other words, the notice of demand is to issue only where there is an order passed under the Act. The order has also to say what amount was to be recovered from the assessee. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is what the assessee had explained and why the ITO had considered that the said explanation of the assessee was not satisfactory and that the imposition of a penalty was called for. In other words, the order levying the penalty had to be a speaking order which attribute could not be given to an entry in the order sheet. If the entry was, of course, complete in all these respects, in that event, a copy of the said entry could go to the assessee and not a copy of another unsigned paper lying on the file. In the instant case the entry in the order sheet was not a speaking entry and it did not indicate the amount directed to be collected from the assessee. Accordingly the said entry in the order sheet was not an order as had been referred to s .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates