9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (9) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e sum of Rs. 1,500 since imposed on the assessee by the ITO, under s. 140-A(3) of the IT Act, 1961, has been upheld. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal, are, that the assessee filed his return of income for the asst. yr. 1974-75, on6th Aug., 1974. The net income declared was Rs. 34,328, on which income-tax payable on self-assessment basis worked out to Rs. 9,390. The assessee had no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount involved and also the fact that the assessee paid the tax in February to September, 1977, in instalments, the order of the ITO levying penalty, was confirmed. 5. Still aggrieved, the assessee has come up in second appeal. Before us, the learned counsel has contended on the same lines as he contended before the learned AAC. The learned counsel has further contended that the very fact, tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Revenue, the matter went to the Hon'ble High Court with the following reference :-- "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty of Rs. 10,000 levied under s. 140-A(3) of the IT Act, 1961?" The question referred to, was answered against the Revenue. 6. On its part, the Revenue have supported the orders of the lower authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t could not be made due to paucity of funds goes unrebutted. Accordingly, we are of the view, and do hold, of course respectfully following also the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of R.B.L. Banarsi Dass & Co. (P) Ltd.(1), that levy of penalty on the facts and in the peculiar circumstances of the case, in appeal before us, was not warranted. As such we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
