9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (1) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. The facts are that return was due to beneficiary filed by the assessee on or before 30th Sept., 1971. The return was, however, filed by the assessee late on 27th Nov., 1973. Penalty proceedings were, therefore, initiated for default under s. 271(1)(a). Show cause penalty notice was issued to the assessee. In response to that the assessee submitted that income of the assessee was below taxabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al. 3. The Counsel for the assessee argued before us that as the return income of the assessee was below taxable limit and the assessee was, therefore, under the bona fide belief that there being no taxable income for the year under appeal there was no need to file any return, and this is why no return was filed within due date. The assessee, therefore, claims that it was prevented by reasonabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iary assessed to buy peace and settle the matter with the Department, says the counsel therefore of the assessee. We are of the view that in view of the endorsement made by the assessee on the return it cannot beneficiary said that no bona fide belief was entertained by the assessee that its income being below taxable limit, there was no need to file any return. Simply because the assessee agreed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Punjab High Court in the case of M/s Sohinder Singh Bros. (2), is more squarely applicable to the case of the assessee than the decision of the Punjab High Court in the case of Pratap Steel Rolling Mills, vs. CIT (1), being relied on by the Revenue. In the case of M/s Sohinder Singh Bros. (2), the ITO made a noting on the face of the return as follows: "The assessee has agreed to overal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e and not the returned income. The question is: whether the assessee believed returned income to be correct. There is nothing on record to show that returned income was untrue to the knowledge of the assessee and that assessed income of Rs. 20,000 was believed to be the income by the assessee from the very beginning. The finding is that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause. The admission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
