1979 (6) TMI 58

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2. The return of income for the impugned assessment year was due on 30th June, 1971. The assessee, however, filed the return on 22nd May, 1972. The delay in filing the return was for ten completed months. The ITO, however, levied the penalty under s. 271(1)(a) by taking the default for six months presumably on the ground that the assessee filed form No. 6 seeking extension of time. The ITO, theref .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... order giving no reason for the imposition of the penalty. In such a case, the imposition of penalty is not justified. 4. The learned departmental representative, on the other hand, submitted that the assessee did not show any reasonable cause for late filling of the return of income and hence, the levy of penalty was justified. 5. We have given our due consideration to the submissions of th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ee was, therefore, under a bona fide belief that its applications for extension were favourably entertained. We have also found that the ITO has also passed a stereotyped order without giving any reasons for the imposition of penalty. Thus, penalty cannot be levied under any conceivable circumstance. We, therefore, see no reason to sustain the order of the ITO. The penalty is accordingly deleted. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X