9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (11) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly. In the absence of the same the ITO proceeded to levy a penalty of Rs. 10,080. 3. In the course of the first appellate proceedings the assessee raised the following grounds on which it was pleaded that the penalty be cancelled : "(i) Form No. 6 was filed. (ii) Mother of the partner expired on 24th May, 1981. (iii) In 1984, the son and father of partner met with an accident. (iv) The accountant left services. (v) Books of earlier years could not be completed." The AAC examined items (ii) to (v) and found them to be baseless and unsupported by any evidence whatsoever. He also found that the business of the appellant had flourished from year to year and in so far as the filing of the return was concerned, the assessee w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alty. 5. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, strongly supported the orders passed by the tax authorities reiterating thereafter the reasons recorded in the said orders in support of the penalty. According to him, the mere filing of an extension application unsupported by any evidence did not shift the onus to the Department and in any case the same had lost its importance in view of a later Supreme Court decision. In support of the aforesaid arguments he placed reliance on the following: (i) CIT vs. Goel Engg. Corpn. (1991) 99 CTR (All) 135 : (1991) 188 ITR 461 (All) (ii) Gujarat Travancore Agency vs. CIT (1989) 77 CTR (SC) 174 : (1989) 177 ITR 455 (SC) In concluding his arguments the learned Departmental ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der s. 271(1)(a) on the ground that the advance tax paid was more than the assessed tax. A perusal of the order of the AAC for asst. yr. 1982-83 shows that the reasons similar to the ones as advanced in asst. yr. 1983-84 were given for the delay in the filing of the return and these were rejected by the first appellate authority. In our opinion the benefit of an earlier year's delay in the filing of the income-tax return can be given in the subsequent assessment year only if the delay in the earlier year is on account of a reasonable cause and according to us the payment of excess advance tax over and above the assessed tax is not a reasonable cause but something in the realm of mens rea. 7. We also find on a perusal of the record that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
