2002 (7) TMI 55

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to this court for its opinion: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that no penalty under section 271(1)(a) could be levied against the registered firm for delay in filing the return when the advance tax paid by the firm exceeded the assessed tax pay able by the firm and the assessment resulted in refund?" The assessment .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y was leviable, is correct in law. While dealing with this question, this court has referred to the decision of CIT v. Damjibhai and Brothers [1976] CTR 23 (Guj) and CIT v. Jasbhai Motibhai and Co. I.T.R. No. 205 of 1975, decided on February 26, 1979. Following the ratio laid down by this court in these two decisions, this court has taken the view that the Tribunal was not justified in holding th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the question will remain as to whether the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing a return of income in time. This issue is not decided by the Tribunal, and no material is available before us to decide the said issue in this reference. We, therefore, direct the Tribunal to decide this issue while giving effect to the order of this court in the present reference by passing orders u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X