SATISH CHANDRA, R. M. SAHAI
Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax – Appellant
Versus
Chunni Lal Anand – Respondent
Satish Chandra, C.J.
1. FOR the assessment year 1968-69 the assessee should have filed his return under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, on or before June 30, 1968. The return was, however, filed on December 30, 1969. The WTO imposed penalty under Section 18(1)(a) of the W.T. Act, 1957. When the matter reached the Tribunal, it held that the law as it stood on April 1 of the assessment year, namely, April 1, 1968, was applicable in order to determine the quantum of the penalty imposable. At the instance of the department, the Tribunal has referred the question of law, namely, whether penalty under Section 18(1)(a) was leviable with regard to the provisions as they stood on April 1, 1968, or with reference to the provisions as they stood on April 1, 1969.
2. IT may be mentioned that on April 1, 1969, the provisions of Section 18(1)(a) were amended.
In CWT v. Ram Narain Agrawal [1977] 106 ITR 965 (All), it was held that the law as it stood on the date of the default, namely, on the last date when the return was due, is the law which is applicable. The return was due on or before June 30, 1968. Therefore, the law as it stood on that date would be applicable. Though we agree with the ul
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.