9911796707
TMI Blog1970 (8) TMI 20X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Messrs. Munshi Ram Tilak Raj of Amritsar, the relevant notice under section 22(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was published in April, 1960. This notice directed the filing ofthe returns by the assessee within 65 days of its publication. However, the returns for both the years were filed on the 18th of December, 1962. Admittedly, there was a delay of 30 months and 18 months, respectively, i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d before 1st April, 1962, be ignored on the ground of the violation of articles 14 and 20(1) of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the penalties imposed were reduced to Rs. 1,150 and Rs. 1,165, respectively, by his consolidated order dated the 11th December, 1963. On appeal, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench "B") held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had erred in holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, should be determined with reference to the provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the penalties of Rs. 1,150.00 and Rs. 1,165.00, which were less than the minimum prescribed by section 271(1)(i) were reasonable? " Mr. D. N. Awasthy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng : " We are further unable to agree that the language of section 271 does not warrant the taking of proceedings under that section when a default has been committed by failure to comply with a notice issued under section 22(2) of the Act of 1922. It is true that clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 271 mentions the corresponding provisions of the Act of 1961, but that will not make the part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
