1983 (3) TMI 107

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....981 sustaining a penalty of Rs. 2,630 levied by the ITO under section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1978-79. 2. The assessee, a registered firm, is a wholesale dealer in grocery. The turnover in the accounting year relevant to the assessment year 1978-79 was about Rs. 1,47,99,235. The return of income under section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act which was due on 31st Jul....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....therefore, considered that the penalty is justified. 4. The assessee in further appeal before us has contended that there had been no conscious disregard of the statutory obligation to file the return on the part of the assessee, the failure has been properly explained and the facts and circumstances of the case do not justify imposition of any penalty. It was pointed out that the assessee had,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that this is a fit case which attracts the levy of penalty. On the admitted facts, there had been only a delay for two complete months. As already stated, the assessee is a registered firm having substantial turnover. For filing the return, the assessee has to finalise the accounts and ascertain the profits. It is not as though the income accrues every day and it is possible for the assessee to de....