| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1992 SLG 1767 1992 SLD 1767 (1992) 197 ITR 174 |
Rajasthan High Court
V.S. DAVE AND N.C. SHARMA, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
V.S. DAVE AND N.C. SHARMA, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Commissioner of Wealth Tax
v.
R.K. Golecha (HUF)
Law:
Section:
Section 27(3), read with section 18(1)(a), of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Reference - Question of fact - Assessment year 1974-75 - In reply to show cause notice issued under section 18(1)(a), assessee prayed to WTO to call for record from Tribunal in main proceedings - However, said WTO changed and succeeding WTO without issuing a fresh notice imposed penalty upon assessee under section 18(1)(a) - Tribunal set aside penalty order holding that no notice of hearing was given before penalty order was passed by successor WTO - Whether question of law arose from Tribunal's order - Held, no FACTS In reply to the show-cause notice under section 18(1)(a), the assessee prayed to the WTO to call for the record from the Tribunal in the main proceedings. However, the said WTO changed and the succeeding WTO, without issuing a fresh notice, imposed penalty upon the assessee under section 18(1)(a). On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed the penalty order. On second appeal, the Tribunal set aside the penalty order holding that no notice of hearing was given before the penalty order was passed by the successor of WTO and, thus, the assessee had not been provided an opportunity to argue his case regarding the imposition of penalty. It also rejected the revenue's reference application under section 27(1). On an application for reference under section 27(3): HELD An assessee has a right to argue his case by himself or by his authorised representative before the concerned authority who is obliged to issue notice about the date of hearing. In the present case, it was true that the show-cause notice had been given earlier to the assessee, who had filed the reply and had prayed for calling for the record from the Tribunal in the main proceedings. It was thereafter that the WTO changed and the succeeding WTO did not think it proper to issue afresh notice. May be, in the circumstances, if the date had been fixed earlier, no fresh notice would have been necessary but there was no such indication available from the record and it was a question of fact whether sufficient opportunity was granted to the assessee for hearing or not. The reference application was, therefore, dismissed…
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