9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (11) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 1966-67 was filed on April 6, 1972, and the assessment order was made on April 12, 1972. The returns for the other assessment years had been filed on or about March 22, 1972, and the assessments were completed on March 28, 1972. The returns were due to be filed by 30th of June of 1966 and of the subsequent years, and obviously the returns had been filed belated. The WTO, (Assessment-7), Circle-1, Bangalore, had issued notices to show cause why penalty should not be imposed under s. 18(1)(a) of the Act. The assessee had sent a reply thereto. He also filed an application on August 14, 1972, before the CWT, under s. 18(2A) of the Act. It transpires that the WTO imposed penalties by his orders made on March 14, 1974. The order of the CWT is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case, it must be held that the petitioner had voluntarily and in good faith made full and true disclosure of his net wealth. His argument was that the requirement of good faith as stipulated in s. 18(2A) of the Act is that good faith in making a full and true disclosure of the net wealth at the time of the disclosure, had to be ascertained, and a contrary finding cannot be arrived at merely because at some time past there was some default or want of good faith on the part of the petitioner. He placed reliance upon the observations made in the cases of S. Sannaiah v. CIT [1974] 95 ITR 435(Kar), Shankara Apaya Swami v. WTO [1976] 103 ITR 649 (Kar), Hasan Ahmad Khan v. CWT [1975] 99 ITR 414 (All) and Jakhodia Brothers v. CIT [1978] 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h had not been made, it could not be said that the return had been filed in good faith. This contention was not accepted by the Allababad High Court, and it was observed that the expression " in good faith made full disclosure of his net wealth " merely means that the assessee should have honestly described all his assets and liabilities which go to constitute his net wealth, along with their estimated value, and the mere fact that the estimated value given by the assessee was ultimately not accepted by the assessing authority would not result in the assessee being treated as having acted in bad faith. In Jakhodia's case [1978] 115 ITR 61 (AII), the provision for consideration was s. 273A of the I.T. Act, 1961. In that case, the CIT had com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The mere fact of the returns having been filed late, would not, by itself, amount to want of good faith. In the instant case, it is seen that the wealth, as had been disclosed by the petitioner, had been accepted by the WTO and the assessment has been made accordingly. The expression " good faith " is not defined in the Act, but it is defined in s. 3(22) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, as follows : " a thing shall be deemed to be done in ' good faith ' where it is in fact done honestly, whether it is done negligently or not. " The requirement of s. 18(2A) of the Act is that the full and true disclosure of the net wealth must be in good faith. If it has been done honestly, it should be considered as having been done in good faith whether ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
