SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(P&H) 132

O.CHHINNAPPA REDDY, S.P.GOYAL
Karam Singh – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Income-tax – Respondent


Judgment

O.Chinnappa Reddy, J.

1. For the assessment year 1966-67, a notice under Section 139(2) was issued on May 2, 1966, and served on the assessee on June 24, 1966. The return was required to be filed on or before July 24, 1966. The assessee, however, submitted his return on June 27, 1967. After June 24, 1966, and before June 27, 1967, he had filed some applications before the Income-tax Officer seeking extension of time for furnishing the return. No orders were passed on those applications. The Income-tax Officer levied a penalty of Rs. 6,145 under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act for the failure of the assessee to file a return. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner held that the assessee could be penalised for not filing the return from 30th March, 1967, and not earlier as he had sought extension up to March 30, 1967, by the various applications filed by him. On that basis, he reduced the penalty to Rs. 349. The department preferred an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal was of the view that the assessee not having filed applications for extension before the prescribed time, the applications were invalid. Therefore, the Tribunal held that the asses



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top