9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (10) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hallenging the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax, refusing to waive the interest levied by the Income-tax Officer under section 139(8). The first petitioner is a registered partnership firm while petitioners Nos. 2 to 7 are its partners. For the assessment year 1973-74, the return had to be filed on or before July 31, 1973. The return was, however, filed on June 12, 1974. For the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 's case before the Commissioner was that he could not file the returns in time inasmuch as the sales tax authorities conducted raid on his premises on July 19, 1973, and took away all the account books and other documents. These documents were returned to him only on December 9, 1974, and hence the delay. This explanation was rejected by the Commissioner with reference to the proceedings of the Sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aterial to support the petitioner's version. He, therefore, preferred to believe the recitals contained in the order (annexure-5). Accordingly, the Commissioner rejected the application. So far as the assessment year 1973-74 is concerned, it may be noticed that the petitioner filed his return in June, 1974, while, according to him, the books were returned only in December, 1974. It is now explaine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ticed that the return was filed on October 1, 1975, when the books were returned even according to the petitioner in December, 1974. Therefore, the delay has remained unexplained. It is now contended by Sri Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner that, on the very same facts, the Tribunal has deleted the penalty levied under section 271(1)(a). The order of the Tribunal dated November 16, 1983, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
