https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66539 The ITAT Hyderabad-B held that penalties under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act could be imposed on the legal representative for delay in filing wealth-tax returns, rejecting the argument that legal representatives cannot be penalized under this provision. The ITAT adjusted the default period for penalties to commence from 1-1-1988, with a period of default set at 13 completed months for the relevant assessment years. Consequently, the ITAT partly allowed the revenue's appeals, reinstating the penalties but modifying the default period based on the circumstances presented. en-us Fri, 27 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:41:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66539 The ITAT Hyderabad-B held that penalties under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act could be imposed on the legal representative for delay in filing wealth-tax returns, rejecting the argument that legal representatives cannot be penalized under this provision. The ITAT adjusted the default period for penalties to commence from 1-1-1988, with a period of default set at 13 completed months for the relevant assessment years. Consequently, the ITAT partly allowed the revenue's appeals, reinstating the penalties but modifying the default period based on the circumstances presented. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Fri, 27 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66539