TMI Blog1980 (2) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T.R.Cs. Nos. 142, 144 and 146 of 1978 are at the instance of the department and the other three are at the instance of the assessee. The questions referred are as follows (1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in entertaining the ground of the department that the appeals to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and consequently the appeals to the Tribunal were incompetent ? (2) If the answer to question No. (1) is in the affirmative, whether the Tribunal, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, was justified in deciding that, once an order has been passed under section 18(2A) of the Wealth-tax Act by the Commissioner, the order of the Wealth-tax Officer was effaced and henc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the WTO, 1, Special Survey Circle. It, however, transpires that subsequently consequent on the abolition of the Special Survey Circle, the files were transferred to the VIth WTO, Circle I. He made an order on March 11, 1975, imposing penalties, which, according to him, were the minimum penalties imposable under the Act. It transpires that the Commissioner passed orders on the application filed under s. 18(2A) on March 21, 1975. He reduced the minimum penalty leviable and fixed them as follows : Rs. 1966-67 5,000 1967-68 5,000 1968-69 5,000 as against the minimum penalty leviable, according to the WTO, at Rs. 16,860, Rs. 16,500 and Rs. 16,330, respectively. Consequent on this, the WTO communicated to the assessee on April ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he penalties imposable under s. 18(1)(a) should be in accordance with the provisions of the said section as they stood before they were amended with effect from April 1. 1969, and in the circumstances of the case, the penalty should have been restricted to fifty per cent. of the tax payable. However, in view of the other conclusion, no relief was afforded to the assessee and the appeals were dismissed. The main contention on behalf of the department in the references sought for by it is in regard to the conclusion about the quantum of penalty that could be levied and that is question No. 4 referred to this court. The other three questions-have been referred at the instance of the assessee. So far as the first question is concerned, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue of notice to him under sub-section (2) of section 14, voluntarily and in good faith, made full disclosure of his net wealth; and in the case referred to in clause (ii) of this sub-section has, prior to the detection by the Wealth-tax Officer of the concealment of particulars of assets or of the inaccuracy of particulars furnished in respect of the assets or debts in respect of which the penalty is imposable, voluntarily and in good faith, made full and true disclosure of such particulars; (b) has co-operated in any enquiry relating to the assessment of the wealth represented by such assets; and (c) has either paid or made satisfactory arrangements for payment of any tax or interest payable in consequence of an order passed unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovision in the Act that the Commissioner could act. This provision did not override or obliterate the jurisdiction conferred on the other authorities under the Act. The Tribunal observed thus, after referring to the opening words in s. 18(2A) of the Act : " This shows that the jurisdiction conferred on the Commissioner of Wealth-tax in the above, section is overriding the jurisdiction of the Wealth-tax Officer and the other authorities mentioned in section 18(1) in the matter of levy of penalty under clauses (a) to (e) thereof. This has to be so in the very nature of things and the scheme of the Act ...... Observation to this effect has been made in para. 13 of its order and in other places also. In our opinion, this observation is u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of imposition of penalty. Consequently, the right of appeal (available) to the assessee against the order of the WTO imposing penalty under s. 18(1)(a) (even subject to the reduction as directed by the Commissioner) is not lost. The Tribunal was in error in holding that the appeals before the AAC were not maintainable. Accordingly, question No. 2 is answered in the negative, i.e., the order of the WTO was not effaced consequent on the order made by the Commissioner under s. 18(2A) of the Act in the instant cases and appeals could be filed to the appellate authorities. So far as question No. 3 is concerned, it appears to be incongruous and unnecessary. The Tribunal held that the assessee had adequate opportunity for showing cause against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
