TMI Blog1992 (4) TMI 63X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ile the assessee in ITA No. 797 filed a reply that the work of income-tax was handled by one advocate, that the assessee had handed over that work to another practitioner filed the return and hence the delay. The ITO considered this reply unsatisfactory. According to the penalty order in ITA No. 795 the penalty had been imposed because the ITO found that delay was very long i.e. of 17 months which could not be ignored. The penalty order in ITA No. 796 shows that the assessee had asked for benefit of Amnesty Scheme but the ITO held that it could not be granted at that stage and so he imposed the penalty. In ITA No. 797 the penalty order shows that it has been imposed because the ITO did not find the explanation of the assessee to be satisfac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was shown by the facts that the assessees had changed their advocate. 3. Before the Tribunal, the assessees' advocate explained in detail the plea taken before the Dy. Commissioner. He stated that the income-tax work of the firm where the assessees were partners was earlier handled by one advocate and the assessees were solely depended upon that advocate. Thereafter the income-tax work was entrusted to the present advocate of the assessees who enquired from the assessees whether return for the asst. year 1982-83 as well as the return for the asst. year 1981-82 had been filed and found that the former advocate had not filed those returns nor had he advised the assessees to file the same. Thereupon the present advocate advised the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... about their responsibility to the the return. He also distinguished the aforesaid decision in the case of Ranjitsinji on the ground that the assessee was an IAS Officer living outside India whereas the present assessees are living within India and so they did not have to depend upon the advocate to the the returns. 5. In our view, it would be fair to say that most people have to depend upon their advocate or tax consultant to inform them about their responsibility regarding taxation. For that purpose, it is not necessary to rely upon the above Tribunal decision in the case of Ranjitsinhji. It may be possible to distinguish that decision on the ground that the assessee in that case was outside India whereas the present assessees are withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessment tax would be in a better position than an assessee who pays it. The requirement of filing of return is a specific separate requirement. The assessees as stated above had to depend upon a tax adviser for the advice and they do mostly what they are advised to do. If they are advised to pay the self-assessment tax they pay it. If they are advised to file the return they file it. If they are advised to the the return but not advised to pay the self-assessment tax they file the return but do not pay the tax. If they are advised to pay the self-assessment tax but not advised to file the return they pay the tax but do not file the return and finally if they are not advised to do either they do neither. Therefore, all the above appeals fal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
