9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (4) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1957, at the instance of the Commissioner of the Income-tax for the opinion of this court on the following common question: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the amended provision for the computation of quantum of penalty under section 18(1)(a) were not applicable to the assessment year 1968-69, the return of which w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ference to the net wealth as had been inserted in section 18 of the Wealth-tax Act, with effect from April 1, 1969. Against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal for non-deletion of the penalty in toto, whereas the Department also came in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner directing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Smt. Maya Rani Punj v. CIT [1986] 157 ITR 330 (SC). It was a case under the Income-tax Act and the question of imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Act was under consideration. It was observed that the accrual of penalty depends upon the terms of the statute imposing it and that non-filing of the return was treated to be a continuing default the wrong for which penalty is to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
