9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (8) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Act, 1922 ?" The circumstances, which it is necessary to notice for the disposal of this reference, briefly stated are these : Gokuldas Pradeepkumar and Mukanddas Vishnukumar, the two Hindu undivided families, came into existence as a result of partial partition of the bigger Hindu undivided family of Seth Thakurdas Khivraj. The business of Seth Thakurdas Khivraj was taken over by a partnership firm of M/s. Thakurdas Khivraj. The first assessment in the bands of the two undivided Hindu families after partial partition was to be made for the assessment year 1959-60. The two assessees had their sources of income from house property, share of profit from the firms of M/s. Khivraj Rathi Ginning and Pressing Factory, Beawar, and M/s. Thaku ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts of the Rajasthan case were different. The Tribunal found that there was a delay of 5 days only in respect of the assessment year 1959-60 and there was a reasonable excuse for such delay, but held that so far as the year 1960-61, it could not be said that the assessee had any reasonable cause for the delay in the submission of the return. The Tribunal accordingly found that the penalties imposed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner were not legal and, if recovered, should be refunded. The Commissioner of Income-tax, Jaipur, moved the Tribunal under section 256(1) in regard to both the assessees and for both years of assessment and the Tribunal has referred the above-mentioned question in a consolidated form for our answer. We have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Jain Brothers' case, that section 297(2)(g) was clearly applicable to this case inasmuch as the assessment was completed on or after the 1st day of April, 1962, when the new Act came into force. They further observed that the provisions of the new Act contained in section 271 would apply mutatis mutandis to proceedings relating to penalty initiated in accordance with section 297(2)(g) of the new Act. Incidentally, the cases relied upon by the Tribunal in our case were also placed in the statement of the case before their Lordships of the Supreme Court, but in view of Jain Brothers' case the question was answered in favour of the department. It will be interesting to recall that in Indra Co.'s case this court had already held that se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
