9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 331X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivered by 1. DEEPAK GUPTA J.- The aforesaid reference has been made to us to decide the following purported question of law: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, while upholding penalty imposed under section 271 (1) (a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for each of the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85, was right in law in giving the finding that there was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment years. A penalty of Rs. 35,195 was levied for late submission of the return for the year 1983-84 and Rs. 18,385 for the assessment year 1984-85. The assessee had filed appeals, against the orders of levying penalty, and these appeals being I. T. As. Nos. 877 and 878 were dismissed on May 14, 1993 by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, here in after to be referred as "the Tribunal". Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attack as such, trading account/profit and loss/ balance-sheet could not be prepared." 4. The Tribunal partly allowed the application and gave benefit of two months up to September 30, 1983, as prayed for by the assessee in the application for extension of time. Thereafter, the assessee made an application, for reference, to this court and it is in this context that the reference has been made. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner was under treatment after September 30, 1983. There is no material on record to show that the managing partner was not attending the business after September 30, 1983. If the assessee wants extension of time, he must place sufficient material on record before the Assessing Officer along with requisite application to show that there was sufficient cause for condoning the delay for filing the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
