TMI Blog1980 (7) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relevant valuation date in each case. A consolidated statement of the wealth-tax relating to assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69 has been made. The returns of the wealth-tax had to be furnished by the assessee by June 30, 1965, June 30, 1966, June 30, 1967, and June 30, 1968, respectively. The returns of net wealth due under s. 14(2) of the W.T. Act (hereinafter called " the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no reasonable cause justifying the delays in question. The explanation made by the assessee before the AAC in the said four penalty appeals was that he could not file the returns as he was suffering from a heart disease. The assessee came in second appeal before the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal agreed with the AAC that no reasonable cause for the delays in question had been established b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... following question of law has been referred to this court for its opinion : " Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in directing that the penalties for late furnishing of the returns for the assessment years 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69 be recomputed to bring the same in conformity with the provisions of section 18(1)(i), Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Allahabad High Court in CWT v. Ram Narain Agrawal [1977] 106 ITR 965, and in CWT v. Chunni Lai Anand [1979] 116 ITR 355 (All) and by the Madras High Court in CWT v. P. C. M. Sundarapandian [1978] 114 ITR 367. Since the imposition of penalty is not recurring offence, the offence was complete on the date when the return was not filed as prescribed by law. The said offences were, therefore, committed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
