| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 163 2000 SLD 163 2000 PTD 139 (1998) 231 ITR 734 |
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Miscellaneous Civil Cases Nos.485 to 488 of 1993, decision dated: 18-04-1996.
A. R. TIWARI AND N. K., JAIN, JJ
D.D. Vyas for the Commissioner. S. S. Samvatsar for the Assessee.
Miscellaneous Civil Cases Nos.485 to 488 of 1993, decision dated: 18-04-1996.
A. R. TIWARI AND N. K., JAIN, JJ
D.D. Vyas for the Commissioner. S. S. Samvatsar for the Assessee.
COMMISSIONER OF IncomE tax
VS
MUHAMMAD ALI GULAM ALI
Law: Income Tax Act, 1961
Section: 256,271(1),(2).
Income-tax---Reference---Penalty---Registered firm-.-Delay in filing return---tax paid more than assessed tax---Tribunal finding that there was sufficient cause for delay---Finding of fact---No question of law arises---Cancellation of penalty justify ---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, Ss.256 & 271(1), (2). The assessee a registered firm, was levied with penalties by Assessing Officer for late. submission of returns for the assessment years 1981-82 to 1984-85. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals.) deleted the penalties and held that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the returns of income for the assessment years in question. The Tribunal while upholding the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order, found further that the assessee had paid, more advance tax than the assessed tax and there was sufficient cause for non-finalisation. of accounts, The Tribunal rejected the application of the Department under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. On further applications to direct reference under section 256(2), of the question whether for purposes of levy of penalty, the advance tax should have been computed as in the case of an unregistered firm: Held, dismissing the applications for reference, that the two Appellate Authorities after considering the facts of the case had concurrently held that there was sufficient cause for not filing the returns in time. This finding of fact could not be questioned by the Department. Nothing substantial could he demonstrated by the Department, to show that the finding was perverse and not supportable by the evidence on record. The order of the Tribunal was based on an appreciation. of facts and did not give rise to any referable question of law. JUDGMENT N. K. JAIN, J.---In all the aforesaid four miscellaneous cases, the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bhopal, has filed applications under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), seeking a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore, to state the cases and refer the proposed common questions of law, as extracted below for the opinion of this Court: "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the…
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