TMI Blog1970 (8) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereof - whether penalty is imposable under IT Act, 1961 - - - - - Dated:- 25-8-1970 - Judge(s) : PREM CHAND PANDIT., S. S. SANDHAWALIA. JUDGMENT SANDHAWALIA J.-In connection with the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62 of the assessee-firm, Messrs. Munshi Ram Tilak Raj of Amritsar, the relevant notice under section 22(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was published in April, 1960 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore, that the assessments for the two relevant years were completed after the first of April, 1962. The assessee, appealed and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner partially accepting the appeal directed that the delay in furnishing the returns committed before 1st April, 1962, be ignored on the ground of the violation of articles 14 and 20(1) of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence to the High Court and, accepting the same, the Tribunal has referred the following two questions for our opinion : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the penalty leviable under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be determined with reference to the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding the 31st day of March, 1962, and the assessments for both have been completed after the first day of April, 1962. In this context, therefore, we are of the view that the following observations of their Lordships in Jain Brothers case have a direct bearing : " We are further unable to agree that the language of section 271 does not warrant the taking of proceedings under that section when a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee would be liable to a penalty as provided by section 271(1) for the default mentioned in section 28(1) of the Act of 1022, if his case falls within the terms of section 297(2)(g). " The Division Bench case cited on behalf of the revenue also directly covers the points in issue. In our view, therefore, the answer to both the questions referred for decision must be in the negative. There wil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
