9911796707
TMI Blog1951 (8) TMI 21X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CJ. The assessee in this case was assessed for the years 1944-45 and 1945-46. He failed to make the full payment in respect of his assessment for these years. Thereupon on the 23rd of June, 1948, the Income-tax Officer purported to pass an order to the following effect:- "Tax not paid. Issue penalty notice." Pursuant to this order a demand was made for payment under Section 29 and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d from the assessee. It is clear that the direction that the Income-tax Officer has to give under Section 46(1) must be a direction which must take the form of an order and that order must state the specific sum which the assessee has got to pay by way of penalty. The limitation laid down upon the Income-tax Officer under that sub-section is that the amount which the assessee has to pay as penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d can only be served under this section provided tax, penalty or interest is due in consequence of an order passed under the Act. Therefore, the condition precedent to the validity of the notice of demand under Section 29 must be an order passed under the Act and the notice is merely consequential upon that order. Therefore, if there is no order under the Act then no notice can be served under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there must not only be a formal order which imposes a penalty but it must also specify the actual amount of the penalty which the assessee is liable to pay. After that order is passed then consequential upon that order a notice of demand may be served under Section 29 and the assessee has a right of appeal against such order under Section 30 of the Act. Inasmuch as the order passed by the Income-t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
