9911796707
TMI Blog1976 (9) TMI 92X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a registered firm under s. 271(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), relating to the asst. yr. 1971-72. 2.The return for the asst. yr. 1971-72 was due by 30th Sept., 1971. The assessee filed an application before the ITO seeking extension of time till 31st Jan., 1972 vide receipt No. 001903 dt. 27th Sept., 1971 and the assessee filed the return on 31st Jan., 1972. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... extension and so the assessee was under a bona fide belief that time sought for had been allowed. The AAC has pointed out that the petition for extension of time was not on the record, but the assessee had the receipt to show that the petition was filed. He, therefore, held that no penalty was leviable against the assessee. He, therefore, cancelled the penalty order of the ITO. 4. Being aggriev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dt. 27th Sept., 1971 and as the petition for extension of time was not rejected by the ITO and no communication of rejection was made by the ITO, the assessee had bona fide belief that extension of time had been granted. He has also relied on the order of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, where it has been held that it is now well settled that where there is omission to comply with the statutory provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dt. 3rd Oct., 1974 in ITA No. 1830 of 1973-74 has taken a view that the mere filing of petition for extension of time will not be sufficient. The learned departmental representative has not filed before us the order of the Bombay Tribunal. The learned Departmental Representative has submitted that it was the duty of the assessee to find out as to whether the ITO had granted extension of time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, the assessee was under no obligation to file the return. Their Lordships of the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that this finding of the Tribunal was a finding of fact. 9. In view of our discussions above, we hold that there was reasonable cause for the assessee for the delayed filing of the return and so the AAC was justified in cancelling the penalty order of the ITO. We, therefore, u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
