TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 478X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is only on the basis of the revised return of wealth, the assessment took place. We also do not find any support of law to the observations of the AO that the belated return is nonest in the eye of law as such it cannot be revised thereby rendering the revised return of wealth as void ab initio. The observations of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax are perfectly justified and the case of the assessee is squarely falls within the ambit of Section 15 of the Act as such it does not give rise to any penalty proceedings. With this view of the matter, we uphold the findings of the Commissioner of Wealth tax and found it difficult to sustain the penalty levied by the AO. We, therefore, direct the AO to delete the penalty - Decided against revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , amount to furnishing all inaccurate particulars of wealth. On this ground, the DCWT initiated penalty proceedings u/s 18(1)(c) of the Wealth Tax Act and concluded them by levying of penalty of ₹ 16,53,000/-. Appeals preferred challenging the finding of the DCWT and the levy of penalty was allowed by the DCWT by way of impugned order stating that since there are no provisions in the Wealth Tax Act equivalent to Section 234A, 234B and 234C for penal interests on delayed return, there is no concept of delayed return and the return filed u/s 15 of the Act cannot be held as belated or nonest. On this premise, he proceeded further and observed that inasmuch as the assessee filed the return of wealth in accordance with the provisions of se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment, the assessment was completed. Only reason stated by the AO for initiation of penalty was that no revision could be made incase of belated filing of the original return of wealth. Though it is argued by the Ld. DR that the belated return as well as the revised return both are nonest in the eye of the law. We find it difficult to agree with him inasmuch as it is only on the basis of the revised return of wealth, the assessment took place. We also do not find any support of law to the observations of the AO that the belated return is nonest in the eye of law as such it cannot be revised thereby rendering the revised return of wealth as void ab initio. The observations of the Commissioner of Wealth Tax are perfectly justified and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
