9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (5) TMI 27X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hin time for the year under consideration. 2. The facts, in brief, are that the appeal is filed on behalf of Mangal Singh deceased by his legal heir, namely, Kulwant Singh for the year under consideration, the assessee was required to file a return on or before 29th Feb., 1972 in view of the Board's circular No. 78 dt. 17th Feb., 1972. No return was, however, filed by the assessee and ex-parte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AAC concurred with the WTO and he confirmed the impugned penalty. 3. Aggrieved the assessee has come up in appeal to the Tribunal. Sh. Jain, ld. counsel for the assessee argues before us that the assessee was all along under the impression that his wealth consisting of agricultural land was below taxable limit and, therefore, there was no legal obligation on his part to file a return. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 2,23,000 which is below taxable limit. It is, therefore, argued that the fact that the assessee filed return for the asst. yr. 1971-72 showing wealth at Rs. 2,23,000 which is below taxable limit, goes to show that the assessee was really under the belief that his wealth was below taxable limit. For the asst. yr. 1971-72, Shri Jain argues the assessee would not have filed a return but for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th that and, thereafter the assessee could not plead either his ignorance of law or his belief that his wealth was below taxable limit. The notice issued under s. 17 ought to have been complied with by the assessee. We therefore, hold that default under s. 18(1)(a) will commence from the date of service of the notice issued under s. 17 to the assessee. No penalty would be levied for the period com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
