Case Details

Citation(s)
1975 SLG 703 1975 SLD 703 (1975) 100 ITR 336
Punjab and Haryana High Court
IT CASE No. 14 OF 1973, MAY 2, 1974
D.K. MAHAJAN, C.J. AND PRITAM SINGH PATTAR, J
D.N. Awasthy and S.S. Mahajan for the Applicant. Bhagirath Dass and S.K. Hiraji for the
Respondent

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

R.B. Jodhamal Bishan Lal Kuthiala

Law:

Section:

Section 271(1)(a) , read with section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For late filing of return - Assessment year 1959-60 - Whether question whether there is a reasonable came for filling delayed return is a pure question of fact, and no question of law would arise therefrom - Held, yes FACTS Notice under section 22(2) of the 1922 Act, was served on the assessee on 4-11-1959, to file the return of income on or before 8-12-1959. The assessee filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year on 5-8-1961, and thus there was a delay of 19 months in filing the return of income. The assessment was made on a total income which was reduced as a result of the appellate orders. As the assessee had failed to file its return within time, the ITO after giving due opportunity to the assessee imposed a penalty for the delay in filing the return of income. The assessee preferred an appeal against that order to the AAC who decided that up to 30-4-1961, the assessee had a reasonable cause to delay the filing of the return, but there was no reasonable cause within the meaning of section 271(1)(a) to condone the delay in filing the return for the months of May, June and July, 1961, and he reduced the penalty. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal, which deleted the entire penalty holding that the same set of circumstances as were present for reasonable cause for the earlier 16 months, were continuing during the months of May, June and July, 1961, also. On application under section 256(2). HELD The question whether there is a reasonable cause for filing a delayed return is a pure question of fact and no question of law arises therefrom. It is a well-settled rule that an inference of fact from proved facts is a question of fact. Whether there is a reasonable cause or not is a question of fact, for its determination depends on facts The only grounds on which a conclusion of fact can be challenged are (a) that it is not supported by any legal evidence or material, and (b) that the conclusion of fact drawn by the Tribunal is perverse and is not rationally possible. In the instant case, the Tribunal held that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee for…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492