https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38622 The Commissioner's refusal to waive penalty under section 18(2A) of the Wealth-tax Act was upheld because the petitioner did not avail the personal hearing and gave no explanation for filing two returns in the names of Hindu undivided families with the same coparceners. On that record, the view that the returns were not filed in good faith could not be treated as a manifest or apparent error. Interference under article 226 was therefore not warranted, and the order was not shown to suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record. en-us Mon, 14 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Apr 2010 16:10:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38622 The Commissioner's refusal to waive penalty under section 18(2A) of the Wealth-tax Act was upheld because the petitioner did not avail the personal hearing and gave no explanation for filing two returns in the names of Hindu undivided families with the same coparceners. On that record, the view that the returns were not filed in good faith could not be treated as a manifest or apparent error. Interference under article 226 was therefore not warranted, and the order was not shown to suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Mon, 14 Mar 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38622