9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (12) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in cancelling the penalty levied under section 271 (1)(a) ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the view taken by the Appellate Tribunal that no penalty is exigible is sound in law ? The respondent-assessee, an individual, has filed his return of income for the assessment year 1964-65, for the relevant accounting year ending with March 31, 1964, on March 27, 1968, instead of filing the same on or before September 30, 1964. The ITO holding that the assessee failed to file the return within the prescribed time-limit without reasonable cause has imposed a penalty of Rs. 4,940 under s. 271 (1)(a) of the Act by his order dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stated that the Department has not challenged the correctness of the facts that are stated to have contributed to the delay as explained by the assessee and, therefore, according to the counsel for the assessee, it should be held that the Tribunal has accepted the explanation of the assessee. Sri P. Rama Rao, the learned counsel for the Revenue, contends that the Tribunal has not accepted the explanation of the assessee for the delay in filing the return and if it has so accepted, there was no necessity to consider the legal aspect and hold that the Revenue has not established that the assessee has failed to furnish the return within time without reasonable cause in the later portion of the same paragraph. According to the departmental cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the burden of proof adopted by the Tribunal also might have contributed to the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal in cancelling the penalty. We, therefore, hold that the reasoning of the Tribunal is illegal and consequently the order of the Tribunal must be held to be erroneous and contrary to the law enunciated by the aforesaid Full Bench of this court. However, we do not propose to express any opinion on the question whether the assessee has satisfactorily explained the delay in filing the return in the facts and circumstances of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, our answer to the questions is in the negative and in favour of the Department and against the assessee. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has to pass appropriate orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
