https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61060 Penalty notices under the Wealth-tax Act were not invalid merely because the authorised signatory described himself as an Income-tax Officer, since an authorised Income-tax Officer could discharge the functions of a Wealth-tax Officer. However, the penalty could not be sustained because the default occurred before 1 April 1965, when the governing provision required previous approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner before penalty could be imposed, and the record did not show that such approval had been obtained. The penalty deletion was therefore upheld and the Revenue's appeal failed. en-us Thu, 10 Jul 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jan 2011 16:49:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61060 Penalty notices under the Wealth-tax Act were not invalid merely because the authorised signatory described himself as an Income-tax Officer, since an authorised Income-tax Officer could discharge the functions of a Wealth-tax Officer. However, the penalty could not be sustained because the default occurred before 1 April 1965, when the governing provision required previous approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner before penalty could be imposed, and the record did not show that such approval had been obtained. The penalty deletion was therefore upheld and the Revenue's appeal failed. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Thu, 10 Jul 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61060