https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39447 The court upheld the penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing that the burden of proof lies on the assessee to demonstrate a reasonable cause for failure to file the return in time. The court construed the word "and" in Section 271(1)(a) as "or," aligning with legislative intent for timely and proper filing of returns. The writ application was dismissed due to procedural lapses, as the assessee did not seek a reference under Section 256(1). Additionally, a return filed under Section 139(4) was not considered filed under Section 139(1) for penalty purposes, leading to the penalty being upheld in favor of the revenue. en-us Wed, 02 Apr 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Apr 2010 15:24:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39447 The court upheld the penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing that the burden of proof lies on the assessee to demonstrate a reasonable cause for failure to file the return in time. The court construed the word "and" in Section 271(1)(a) as "or," aligning with legislative intent for timely and proper filing of returns. The writ application was dismissed due to procedural lapses, as the assessee did not seek a reference under Section 256(1). Additionally, a return filed under Section 139(4) was not considered filed under Section 139(1) for penalty purposes, leading to the penalty being upheld in favor of the revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 02 Apr 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=39447