9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (7) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mount in question was not chargeable to gift-tax and as such no penalty under section 17(1)(c) is leviable ? " Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the deceased H. H. Maharana Bhagwat Singhji of Mewar (now represented through his son and legal heir M. K. Arvind Kumar Singhji), in response to the notice under section 16 of the Gift-tax Act issued by the Gift-tax Officer, District B-Ward, Udaipur, filed a nil return under protest. The Gift-tax Officer also issued a notice under section 15(2) of the Act to the assessee for the assessment year 1969-70 and in pursuance of which the authorised representative of the assessee attended the proceedings. The assessee was required to file reasons as to why gift of Rs. 2,50,000 to M. K. Arvi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nity of hearing to the assessee, the Gift-tax Officer levied the penalty of Rs. 32,600. The assessee, aggrieved with the order passed by the Assessing Officer, filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals). The appeal was heard by the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals) on August 11, 1989, and the Commissioner allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and set aside the order imposing the penalty of Rs. 32,600 under section 17(1)(c) passed by the Assessing Officer. He, also, upheld the gift to the extent of Rs. 3,09,750 against the gift assessed by the Gift-tax Officer at Rs. 3,94,800. Aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner of Gift-tax (Appeals), both, i.e., the assessee and the Revenue, preferred appeals befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refusing to refer the question proposed by the Revenue in the application for the opinion of the High Court though it is purely a question of law ; and (ii) in the quantum case, the Tribunal has referred the question of law for the opinion of this court. In these circumstances, the Tribunal was not justified in refusing to refer the question referred in the application which is purely a question of law. Learned counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, has submitted that no question of law arises in the present case and the findings arrived at by the Tribunal are purely the findings of fact. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the assessee that even if the quantum reference is answered in favour of the Revenue even then the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 17(1)(c) would not survive since we have deleted the addition ; (ii) section 17(1)(c) requires that the assessee should have concealed the particulars of any gift or deliberately furnished incorrect particulars thereof and in his letter filed along with the return, the assessee has disclosed the material facts ; and (iii) the assessee entertained a bona fide belief that the amount in question do not represent the gifts. The Tribunal, while refusing to state the case and refer the question of law referred in the application, held that these findings arrived at by the Tribunal are purely findings of fact which do not give rise to the question of law and, therefore, the Tribunal declined to refer the question. The finding reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
