9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (1) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in cancelling the penalty levied under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ? 2. Whether the Appellate Tribunal had any valid material to hold that the assessee has no mens rea for furnishing the return belatedly and as such the penalty levied under section 18(1)(a) was not warranted ? " The assessee is an individual. For the assessment year 1974-75, the assessee filed his wealth-tax return belatedly on January 16, 1976, after having filed an application for extension of time up to November 30, 1974. The Wealth-tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 18(1)(a) of the Act for the delay in filing the wealth-tax return. The assessee had not replied to the penalty notice issued under section 18(1)(a) of the Act. The W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt years under consideration. Aggrieved, the Department filed appeals before the Tribunal. The Tribunal pointed out that there could be no mens rea in withholding a small amount of tax payable by the assessee. According to the Tribunal, the assessee is not liable to be penalised unless the Department established that he had acted in deliberate disregard of his statutory obligation. Relying upon the decision in S. Loonkaran and Sons v. CIT [1977] 108 ITR 92 (Mad) and considering the fact that the returns were filed voluntarily, the Tribunal held that there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in cancelling the penalties levied in both the assessment years under consideration. Accordingly, the appeals fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment year 1974-75 and up to September 30, 1975, in the assessment year 1975-76. For the rest of the period of delay, there was no application for extension of time. The assessee also did not reply to the penalty notice sent by the Wealth-tax Officer in both the assessment years under consideration. These facts would go to show that the assessee was conscious of the fact that the wealth-tax returns should be filed within the time stipulated under section 14(1) of the Act. The Tribunal was of the view that it is for the Department to establish that the assessee was guilty of contumacious conduct and acted in conscious disregard of his obligation in filing the returns belatedly. But this view taken by the Tribunal is not in accordance wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
