9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (11) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated a case and referred the following question of law: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the levy of penalty for late submission of return of income for the period from March 17, 1982, instead of cancelling it in its entirety?" The short facts that are necessary for the disposal of the tax case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpleted the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 250 of the Income-tax Act on March 14, 1986, on the basis of the return filed on March 28, 1983. He also initiated the penalty proceedings for the failure on the part of the assessee to file the return on the due date under section 271(1)(a) of the Act and proposed to levy a penalty of Rs. 1,98,560. The assessee was not able to give any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... round to levy penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Act. The Tribunal rejected all the contentions raised by the assessee and held that the assessee had no reasonable cause for not filing the return beyond March 16, 1982. Accordingly, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal upheld the levy of penalty holding that the assessee had no reasonable cause for the delay in filing the return beyond March 16, 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shya Sitharaman, learned senior standing counsel for the Revenue, also. We find from the order of the Appellate Tribunal that there was some litigation relating to the property, viz., Odeon Theatre, and the litigation ended by filing a memo of compromise before this court on December 7, 1981, by the parties to the dispute and the Tribunal also noticed from the record that in March, 1982, the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the materials arrived at the finding that the property dispute was entirely settled in the month of March, 1982, and the assessee had also received a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs on March 16, 1982, in full and final settlement of all such claims and the property dispute did not go beyond the date. We, therefore, hold that the Tribunal was correct in holding that the penalty was leviable on and from March 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
