9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (4) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the asst. year 1975-76 the assessee filed return of wealth on 28th January, 1981 while it was due on 31st July, 1975. The WTO rejected the assessee's explanation and held that he was not prevented by sufficient cause from filing the return within the time allowed. He, therefore, imposed the penalty u/s 18(1)(a). 3. The AAC held the same view but he directed the WTO to recalculate the penalty applying the law as prevailing on the date of initiation of penalty proceedings as decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Maya Rani Punj v. CIT [1986] 157 ITR 330. 4. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the penalty should be calculated in two parts ; one for the period prior to the amendment on 1-4-1976 and anot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in respect of any assessment completed before the 1st day of April, 1962, may be initiated and any such penalty may be imposed as if this Act had not been passed ; (g) any proceeding for the imposition of a penalty in respect of any assessment for the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1962, or any earlier year, which is completed on or after 1st day of April, 1962, may be initiated and any such penalty may be imposed under this Act. . . ." The court has observed as follows :-- "On the facts of the case before us, clause (f) of section 297(2) of the 1961 Act is not attracted because the return was filed on May 3, 1962, and the assessment was made subsequent to April 1, 1962." It has further observed, ". . . the following conclu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t comply with the requirements of law, he continues to be guilty of the infraction and exposes himself to the penalty provided by law. " " We are of the view that the legislative scheme under section 271(1)(a) of the 1961 Act in making provision for a penalty coterminous with the default to be raised provides for a situation of continuing wrong. " Ultimately, the court has held that since in this case the assessments were made on 30th June, 1964 and proceedings for imposition of penalty were directed to be initiated on that day, section 271(1)(a) of the 1961 Act was fully applicable. 7. Therefore, the decision in this case falls into two parts (a) the law in force on the date of initiation of the penalty proceedings i.e. the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
