| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1977 SLG 1157 1977 SLD 1157 (1977) 108 ITR 689 |
Kerala High Court
IT REFERENCE Nos. 39 & 40 OF 1973, APRIL 7, 1975
P. GOVINDAN NAIR, C.J. AND V. KHALID, J.
P.A. Francis and P.K. Ravindranatha Menon for the Applicant. P.K. Shams-ud-Din and K.A. Abdulsalam for the
Respondent
IT REFERENCE Nos. 39 & 40 OF 1973, APRIL 7, 1975
P. GOVINDAN NAIR, C.J. AND V. KHALID, J.
P.A. Francis and P.K. Ravindranatha Menon for the Applicant. P.K. Shams-ud-Din and K.A. Abdulsalam for the
Respondent
Commissioner of Wealth tax
v.
Smt. V. Pathummabi
Law:
Section:
Section 18(1)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Penalty - For late filing of return - Assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 - Returns for assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 were filed by assessee late on 30-3-1970 - Tribunal held that penalty under section 18(1)(i) was to be levied as it stood prior to its amendment by Finance Act, 1969 - Whether if original default, i.e. failure to file return within date stipulated under Act, had not occurred on or after 1-4-1965, section 18(1)(i) as amended had no application in determining question of penalty to be imposed - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, in instant case, penalty for assessment year 1964-65 should be imposed under original section 18(1)(i) as it stood prior to its amendment and, that, section 18(1)(i) as it was amended by Finance Act, 1969, must be applied for imposing penalty for assessment year 1965-66 - Held, yes Words and phrases : Expression 'continued default' as occurred in section 18(1)(i) FACTS The returns for the assessment years 1964-65 and 1965-66 were filed by assessee late on 30-3-1970. The WTO imposed penalties under section 18(1)(i). On appeal, the Tribunal held that even for the default continuing after 1-4-1969, in furnishing the return of Wealth-tax for the assessment years in question, the penalty for every month during which the default continued after 1-4-1969, was to be computed under the law as it obtained on the 1st April of each assessment year alone, that is, under section 18(1)(i), as it stood prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 1969. On reference : HELD A glance at the unamended as well as amended section 18 is sufficient for the purpose of understanding that the penalty that could have been imposed under the section as it stood originally is different from the penalty that can be imposed after it was amended. Before the amendments all that had been provided was the maximum limit of the penalty that could be imposed. The penalty was not geared statutorily to the time lag between the due date of the return and the actual date of filing the return, though in the exercise of discretion by the authorities empowered to act under the section, the time lag may be a matter which…
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