| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 4225 2008 SLD 4225 (2008) 306 ITR 179 |
Gujarat High Court
IT REFERENCE No. 61 OF 1997 MARCH 4, 2008
D.A. MEHTA AND Z. K. SAIYED, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
IT REFERENCE No. 61 OF 1997 MARCH 4, 2008
D.A. MEHTA AND Z. K. SAIYED, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Commissioner of IncomE tax
v.
Kanubhai Muljibhai Patel
Law:
Section:
Section 271(1)(a) of Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For late filing of return Where assessee filed return of income for assessment year 1979-80 on 23-3-1982 showing amount received on sale of agricultural land as exempt in view of Bombay High Court's decision in Manubhai A. Shet v. N.D. Nirgudkar, second ITO which was delivered only in July, 1980, a bona fide belief as to exemption of said income could be entertained by assessee only after decision of Bombay High Court and, therefore, it was only after July, 1980 that penalty u/s 271(1)(a) was not imposable upon assessee. For the assessment year 1979-80 the assessee, a Hindu undivided family, filed a return of income on 23-3-1982, declaring nil income. In the statement, accompanying to the return of income, the assessee had shown the amount received on sale of agricultural land as exempt in view of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Manubhai A. Sheth v. N.D. Nirgudkar, Second ITO [1981] 128 ITR 87. As the return of income had been filed belatedly, the Assessing Officer levied penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(a). T he Tribunal held that as the Bombay High Court had been delivered only in July, 1980, the assessee could not have entertained any reasonable belief as to the taxability or otherwise of capital gains arising out of sale of agricultural land till that point of time, but a bona fide belief could be entertained by the assessee after the of the Bombay High Court, especially when there was no of the Apex Court on the subject. The Tribunal thus came to the conclusion that the assessee was having a reasonable cause since August, 1980 and no penalty u/s 271(1)(a) could be imposed upon assessee after July, 1980. It was apparent that the Tribunal had accepted existence of reasonable cause for a part of the period of delay while rejecting the explanation for another part. In the circumstances, there was no issue of law, which would require this Court to interfere. Existence or otherwise of a reasonable cause would always be dependent upon facts. Thus, the Tribunal's view that the penalty under section 271(1)(a) was not imposable after July, 1980 was correct in law on facts. Manish R.…
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