1988 (9) TMI 85

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... peal is whether the AAC erred in confirming the penalty of Rs. 13,756 under s. 15B of the WT Act. 3. The relevant facts are that the assessee filed a return showing net wealth of Rs. 11,48,195 on 16th Aug., 1980. The tax payable on the wealth returned was Rs. 18,196. The assessee has not paid the tax and the return was not accompanied by the S.A. challan. Therefore, notice under s. 15B was issue .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the default of 38 months. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the AAC. 4. The AAC in his order, corrected the asst. yr. wrongly mentioned by the WTO i.e. 1982-83 instead of 1980-81, and simply said that there was no satisfactory explanation by the assessee. He, therefore, confirmed the penalty levied by the WTO. Being aggrieved by this order, assessee came in second .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... heard rival submissions and considered the material on record. The facts stated by Shri Patil are not in dispute that excess tax was due to be refunded to the assessee of Rs. 19,034. The assessee made requests to the ITO by her various letters to refund the excess amount of tax paid by the assessee, but the ITO has not refunded the same before filing the wealth-tax return. Refund due to the assess .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X