9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (2) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had not filed the returns in time. He, therefore, initiated penalty proceedings under s. 18(1)(a) of the Act and required the assessee to explain the delay. According to the WTO the assessee offered no explanation for the delay committed in filing the returns and from that fact explanation for WTO inferred that the assessee had nothing to say in the matter. He, therefore, felt satisfied that the assessee had failed to file the returns in time without any reasonable cause. He, therefore, levied penalties in the following manner: Asst. yr. Penalty levied 1977-78 Rs. 960 1978-79 Rs. 950 1979-80 Rs. 900 1980-81 Rs. 880 1981-82 Rs. 770 The assessee carrie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the officer of the WTO on 27th March, 1987 as is evidenced from the acknowledgement receipt the photostat copy of which has also been filed before us. No doubt the learned Deptl. Representative tried to meet this argument of Mr. Divetia to the best of his ability but he could not challenge the fact that the letter dt. 25th March, 1987 had been filed by the assessee before the WTO. After having considered the rival submissions on the point and after having gone through the material placed before us we have found ourselves in agreement with Mr. Divetia. 5. By the photostat copy of the receipt it is satisfactorily proved that the assessee had delivered his explanation dt. 25th March, 1987. In his explanation the assessee had stated tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied when the commission of the default contemplated to be penalised in accordance with the provisions of the Act has been satisfactorily proved. In the instant case what we find is that the learned WTO has not even taken the trouble of striking of the not applicable language used in the cyclostyled proforma were prepared for passing an order under s. 271(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961. The WTO even did not take the trouble of striking of the name of the Act even. In para 4, he referred to the Wealth-tax return filed by the assessee as his returns of income. All these clearly show that the WTO did not at all apply his mind to the facts of the case before him levying penalties. That further strengthens the view that the explanation had certainly b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . For all the arguments of Mr. Divetia the learned Deptl. Representative submitted that after deducting the value of jewellery in the years under consideration the wealth of the assessee was taxable and, therefore, he could have entertained no bona fide belief in the matter of filing the returns. It was also submitted that all the facts pointed out were besides the point as has been observed by the learned Dy. CWT(A). After having given our patient consideration to the points raised we are satisfied that the arguments advanced by Mr. Divetia are quite convincing and acceptable. 7. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee had not hitherto been assessed to wealth-tax. Again it is an admitted fact that he had filed all the returns volunta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
