9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (11) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question to this court for its opinion at the instance of the Revenue under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has rightly confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), cancelling the penalty order under section 140A(3) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 15 per cent. interest per annum on self-assessed tax for delayed payment. By order dated September 29, 1978, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cancelled the penalty. By order dated October 31, 1979, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal treated section 140A(3) as non-exi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Madras in the abovereferred case reported in Sali Maricar (A. M.) v. ITO [1973] 90 ITR 116. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Income-tax Appellate, Tribunal erroneously assumed that the abovereferred decision of the High Court of Madras was the only decision on the subject and no other High Court had taken a different view on the validity of the section. At the time when th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n directed to file a writ petition in this court or before the Supreme Court. No such writ petition was filed by the assessee. We are informed by learned counsel of both the sides that several High Courts have now taken the view that section 140A(3) of the Act is valid. Learned counsel for the assessee has invited the attention of the court to the judgment of this court in the case of CWT v. Devi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
