Case Details

Citation(s)
1982 SLG 851 1982 SLD 851 (1982) 134 ITR 647
Madras High Court
TAX CASE No. 1194 OF 1977
BALASUBRAHMANYAN AND PADMANABHAN, JJ.
J. Jayaraman and Mrs. Nalini Chidambaram for the Applicant. S.V. Subramaniam and P.P.S. Janarthana Raja for the
Respondent

Commissioner of IncomE tax

v.

S.K. Sanjan Chettiar & Sons

Law:

Section:

Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For late filing of return - Assessment year 1966-67 - Penalty under section 271(1)(a) was levied on assessee for late filing of return - Assessee offered no explanation for delay before ITO and AAC - Before Tribunal, assessee first time gave his explanation that its managing partner who could prepare, and file complete and correct return was pre-occupied with his daughter's marriage and closely following wedding, he had to go abroad for export orders - Tribunal accepting said explanation as reasonable cause and deleted penalty - Whether finding of Tribunal as to reasonable cause was finding of facts and High Court would not interfere with that conclusion in reference - Held, yes Section 254 of the Income-tax Act 1961 - Appellate Tribunal - Powers of - Whether veracity of facts can be tested by any competent fact-finding body at any point of time when they are presented and if Tribunal had preferred to examine facts placed before it, all by itself and for first time, then that was a matter which was entirely within discretion of Tribunal and its finding could not be said to be vitiated - Held, yes FACTS The penalty was levied under section 271(1)(a) upon the assessee firm for delay in the submission of the return. The assessee offered noexplanation before the ITO. Even before the AAC, the assessee did not explain as to what prevented it from filing the return within the time allowed by section 139 and for this reason, the AAC dismissed the appeal and confirmed the penalty. On further appeal before the Tribunal, an explanation was offered by the assessee to the effect that the return for the year could not be filed in time because the managing partner of the assessee-firm was fully preoccupied with the celebration of the marriage of his daughter and, closely following the wedding, the managing partner had to go aboard in connection with securing export orders. The Tribunal accepted this explanation as plausible as well as reasonable and on that basis recorded a finding that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing the return in time. On the basis of this finding, the Tribunal cancelled…
🔒
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