TMI Blog1977 (7) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 972. The assessee, however, filed return on 27th June, 1973 as there was a delay in submission of WT return, penalty proceedings were initiated. Not being satisfied with the contentions raised by the assessee in penalty proceedings, the WTO imposed penalty in the sum of Rs.16,418 for delay of 11 months under s 18(1)(a) of the WT Act, 1957. The assessee went in appeal to the AAC. He also concurred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of the assessee is that original return had been filed within the prescribed time. The assessee, however, does not possess any evidence to show that original return had been filed by him on or before 30th June, 1972. The counsel for the assessee urges before us now that no penalty can be imposed on the assessee, in as much as the WTO himself admitted the fact in his order. That in the origi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itute paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order, 21st July, 1977 by the following paragraphs. 3. The counsel for the assessee had drawn our attention to the fourth paragraph of the assessment order, dt. 27th June, 1973 passed by the WTO. In this order the WTO observed as follows: "As regards the status in the original return, the assessee has claimed the status as 'Individual' but in the revised retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the observation of the WTO referred to above. He explains that the sentence occurring in the order of the WTO as regards the status in the original, return the assessee has claimed the status as 'individual' but in the revised return he has claimed the status as "H.U.F." was mistakenly reproduced in the machanical manner by the person, who typed out the order, dated 27th June, 1973 of the WTO. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mistake apparent from the record and if the WTO thought that a mistake was committed by the persons who typed out the assessment order dt. 27th June, 1973, then he would have rectified that mistake without any inhibition. We agree with the assessee's counsel that the observation of the WTO supports his case and that creates a doubt. We, therefore, agree with the contention of the assessee and hold ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
