2002 (8) TMI 16

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... N. MATHUR J. -The instant reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur, seeking the opinion of this court on the following substantial question: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of token penalty, below the minimum prescribed by the Act by observing that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aries to his employees and also deposited the same with the State Exchequer in time, yet he failed to file the return of such deductions. Thus, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty of Rs. 24,000 being the minimum under section 272A(2)(c) of the Act. In the first appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) sustained a token penalty of Rs. 2,400. On appeal by the Revenue, the Income-tax Appel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l power to inflict a penalty on the head of the public office. It was further observed that the tax authority should also evolve a method of advising the head of office by way of notice or reminder providing an opportunity to comply with the provisions, the breach of which may lead to levy of penalty. A penalty can be levied only in case the head of office does not act even after such a notice. I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X