1981 (8) TMI 48

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Delhi Bench-A, has referred the following questions at the instance of the assessee, for the opinion of this court: " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, as amended w.e.f. April 1, 1969, would apply in imposing the penalty ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstan .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hallenged only the quantum of penalty imposed. The AAC reduced the penalty to Rs. 279 and Rs. 359 for the two years, respectively. Aggrieved, the department filed appeals before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal has taken the view that a default under s. 18(1)(a) is a continuing default attracting the law as applicable from time to time during the period the default continues. On that view, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e construed strictly. The law operative on the date when the infringement takes place is the law applicable unless it is made applicable expost facto. Similarly, in CIT v. Smt. Raj Rani Devi [1979] 116 ITR 358 (All) the same view has been taken. Following these decisions we hold that the law as applicable on June 29, 1967, and June 29, 1968, for the two years under consideration was applicable an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X