TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1976 (9) TMI 92
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....osed by the ITO against the assessee which is a registered firm under s. 271(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), relating to the asst. yr. 1971-72. 2.The return for the asst. yr. 1971-72 was due by 30th Sept., 1971. The assessee filed an application before the ITO seeking extension of time till 31st Jan., 1972 vide receipt No. 001903 dt. 27th Sept., 1971 and the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on to the assessee regarding the refusal of extension and so the assessee was under a bona fide belief that time sought for had been allowed. The AAC has pointed out that the petition for extension of time was not on the record, but the assessee had the receipt to show that the petition was filed. He, therefore, held that no penalty was leviable against the assessee. He, therefore, cancelled the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f time till 31st Jan., 1972 vide receipt dt. 27th Sept., 1971 and as the petition for extension of time was not rejected by the ITO and no communication of rejection was made by the ITO, the assessee had bona fide belief that extension of time had been granted. He has also relied on the order of the Tribunal, Cochin Bench, where it has been held that it is now well settled that where there is omis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mitted that the Bombay Tribunal in the order dt. 3rd Oct., 1974 in ITA No. 1830 of 1973-74 has taken a view that the mere filing of petition for extension of time will not be sufficient. The learned departmental representative has not filed before us the order of the Bombay Tribunal. The learned Departmental Representative has submitted that it was the duty of the assessee to find out as to whethe....