https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28711 The court held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) was competent to entertain the appeal against the penalty imposed under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The court emphasized the distinction between the Wealth Tax Officer's authority to impose a penalty and the Commissioner's power to waive or reduce the penalty. It ruled that the refusal by the Commissioner to waive the penalty does not automatically imply the absence of reasonable cause for late filing, which falls under the WTO's jurisdiction. The court supported its decision with precedents from various High Courts, affirming the AAC's competence in adjudicating penalty appeals. en-us Mon, 23 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Feb 2010 10:47:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28711 The court held that the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC) was competent to entertain the appeal against the penalty imposed under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The court emphasized the distinction between the Wealth Tax Officer's authority to impose a penalty and the Commissioner's power to waive or reduce the penalty. It ruled that the refusal by the Commissioner to waive the penalty does not automatically imply the absence of reasonable cause for late filing, which falls under the WTO's jurisdiction. The court supported its decision with precedents from various High Courts, affirming the AAC's competence in adjudicating penalty appeals. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Mon, 23 Nov 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28711