TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal on Wealth Tax Return Penalty Recalculated based on Law</h1> <h3>SULTANALI G. JAIRAZBHOY. Versus NINTH WEALTH TAX OFFICER.</h3> SULTANALI G. JAIRAZBHOY. Versus NINTH WEALTH TAX OFFICER. - TTJ 030, 365, Issues: Penalty for delayed filing of wealth tax return for asst. yr. 1975-76.Analysis:The appeal was filed against the order of the CWT(A) for the assessment year 1975-76, concerning the penalty for delayed filing of the net wealth return. The return, originally due on 30th June 1975, was filed on 15th April 1976, resulting in penalty proceedings initiated by the WTO under section 18(1)(a) of the WT Act. The WTO imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,800, which was substantially upheld by the CWT(A), who directed a recalculation based on revised total wealth. The assessee contended that the delay was due to the transfer of the case record between different assessment wards, creating confusion. Additionally, the wealth included assets and interests in the estate and trust of the late father, further complicating the filing process. The assessee argued for an extension of time until 31st Dec. 1975, although evidence supporting this claim was lacking. The departmental representative supported the penalty, emphasizing the continuing default nature of the penalty and the application of the law at the time of the default. The Tribunal upheld the rejection of the explanation for the delay, emphasizing that the transfer of records did not justify the delay, and the failure to produce evidence for the extension application was detrimental to the assessee's case.The Tribunal referenced a previous case concerning the rate at which penalties should be levied for delayed returns, emphasizing the importance of applying the law as it stood at the time of the completion of the assessment. Following this precedent, the Tribunal directed that the penalty for the assessee should be computed based on the law applicable as of 26th March 1980, the date of completion of assessment for the assessment year 1975-76. As a result, the appeal was partly allowed, indicating a recalculated penalty in line with the law at the time of assessment completion.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
