TMI Blog1981 (4) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally correct to ignore the finding of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax with regard to irregularities committed in the order-sheet and on the body of the order, on the basis of the argument canvassed by the Department which were made not in accordance with Rule 10 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunals legally correct to conclude that irregularities found in the order-sheet and on the body of the order do not invalidate the order of penalty? (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Tribunal is not perverse being inconsistent with the evidence on r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould have been raised by the Income-tax Officer if returns were filed. In our considered opinion, this reason cannot be regarded as a reasonable cause for non-filing of returns within the specified time; rather it goes against the Assessee, for it can be legitimately presumed from this contention of the Assessee that it was aware of its obligation to file the return in terms of Section 139(1) but they were not filed in apprehension of payment of heavy taxes which might collapse its business. The income returned by the Assessee also go to suggest that the Assessee was cautious about proper running of its business but returns were not filed in order to defraud the Revenue. The past records of the Assessee further prove the fact of its habitua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... older by which penalty has been imposed seems to have been dated 12/15-3-1974. The contention raised in the explanation seems to have been taken into account while imposing the order of penalty. Though there is some confusion on account of two separate orders not having been written one on 12th March and another on 15th March, the material available on record does not go to conclusively, indicate that the order was actually passed on 12th March, 1974 while Assessee offered his explanation on 15th March, 1974. The presumption attached to the correctness of official records cannot be taken away merely by assumptions or suggestions raising doubts. 4. We, however, do not appreciate the practice prevailing in the Income-tax Department of issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
