9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (11) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sment was valid – held that, during pendency of application for cancellation of assessment, penalty for non-payment of tax could not be levied - order of penalty is invalid - - - - - Dated:- 30-11-1971 - Judge(s) : B. VENKATASWAMI., G. K. GOVINDA BHAT. ORDER The judgment of the court was delivered by GOVINDA BHAT J.- This matter arises under the Mysore Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1957, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was rejected. However, the case was posted for hearing with regard to the making of assessment under section 19(4) of the Act, on November 29, 1968, at Lakshmeshwar camp. The petitioner was served with the notice of hearing on November 22, 1968. Yet he did not appear nor did he communicate his inability to attend the hearing. Since nobody appeared on November 29, 1968, the assessing authority adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from making his return required by section 18 or that he had not a reasonable opportunity to comply or prevented by sufficient cause from complying with the terms of the notice issued under the Act. On the same day, the first respondent made an order under section 42(2) of the Act levying a penalty of Rs. 242.50. Aggrieved by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proper exercise of discretion on the part of the Agricultural Income-tax Officer to impose penalty under section 42, if the assessee is in default in making payment of the agricultural income-tax during the period of the pendency of the application under section 21. Therefore, the levy of penalty cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed. The order of assessment made under section 19(4) da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alleged that the yield as computed by the Agricultural Income-tax Officer is in excess of the notified yield. So also, he has not shown that the rate for each commodity is in excess of the prices notified under the Mysore Land Reforms Act. No other question has been urged in this writ petition. For the reasons stated above, we, quash the order of penalty dated July 21, 1969, and direct the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
