https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21101 The court held that the failure to file returns is a continuing offence, with penalties imposed for each month of non-compliance, as established in Maya Rani Punj v. CIT. Regarding penalty quantification, the court ruled that penalties for delays before April 1, 1969, should be based on unamended rates, and for delays after that date, on amended rates under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act. This decision aligns with the Supreme Court's directive in CWT v. P. N. Banerjee, emphasizing the need to calculate penalties based on the law prevailing before and after the amendment. en-us Tue, 04 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:48:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21101 The court held that the failure to file returns is a continuing offence, with penalties imposed for each month of non-compliance, as established in Maya Rani Punj v. CIT. Regarding penalty quantification, the court ruled that penalties for delays before April 1, 1969, should be based on unamended rates, and for delays after that date, on amended rates under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act. This decision aligns with the Supreme Court's directive in CWT v. P. N. Banerjee, emphasizing the need to calculate penalties based on the law prevailing before and after the amendment. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Tue, 04 Aug 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=21101