9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (11) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 82, in full and final settlement of all such claims and the property dispute did not go beyond the date. We, therefore, hold that the Tribunal was correct in holding that the penalty was leviable on and from March 17, 1982. Accordingly, we answer the question of law referred to us in the affirmative, against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. - - - - - Dated:- 26-11-2002 - Judge(s) : N. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN., K. RAVIRAJA PANDIAN. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by N.V. BALASUBRAMANIAN J.-As per the directions of this court, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence the Income-tax Officer levied penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Act. However, on appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) found that there was some property dispute in the assessee's family and the existence of the property dispute would constitute reasonable cause for the delay in filing the return and granted 12 months further time from the due date for filing the return. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the levy of penalty from July 31, 1982. The assessee took the matter in appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the failure of the assessee to file the return is also a ground to levy penalty under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the Tribunal also noticed from the record that in March, 1982, the assessee had received a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs on March 16, 1982, from the other party in full and final settlement of his claim over his half share in the land and building, viz., Odeon Theatre, with all equipments. The Tribunal also therefore held that after the family dispute was settled by a memo of compromise and receipt of the money by the assessee in full settlement of his rights, the assessee had no reasonable cause for the delay in filing the return beyond March 16, 1982. We find that the Tribunal was quite justified in taking the view that the assessee had no reasonable cause beyond March 16,1982. Though the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in the appellate ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
