1979 (8) TMI 106

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the time of completing the assessment started proceedings under s. 271(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961. 3. For the asst. yr. 1969-70, in response to service of notice under s. 148 of the Act, the return was to be filed by 16th Sep., 1974, but it was actually filed on 31st Oct., 1974. For this year also, the ld. ITO initiated penalty proceedings under s. 271(1)(a) of the Act. 4. In penalty proceedings, before the ld. ITO, in both the years under consideration, it was submitted that the notices under s. 148 of the Act were served on one Shri K.S. Menon, When Shri V.C. Surana, who used to look after the IT matters, was out of India. After his return, it was found that Shri Menon left for his hometown in Kerala as his father has expired. The n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he service of the notice under s. 148 of the Act. Writ Petition was filed before the Hon'ble High Court. After the Writ Petition, there was oral discussion with the Department, and ultimately, it was agreed that the assessee may file settlement petition. The assessee also filed returns for both the years under consideration. Thus, it was contended that the ld. ITO was not justified in imposing the penalties. 7. The contention of the assessee did not find favour with the ld. AAC So, he agreed with the finding of the ld. ITO. 8. Before the Tribunal, more or less the same contentions were advanced which were put forth before the authorities below. The ld. counsel again reiterated his contentions and stated that immediately after the serv....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uct of the assessee has been contumacious and the assessee in conscious disregard of its obligation, failed to file the returns within time. 10. We have heard the parties, and perused the entire evidence on record. From the material on record, it comes out that for the asst. yr. 1966-66, notice under s. 148 of the Act was served on 29th Dec., 1973 and the return was to be filed on or before 29th Jan., 1974. Similarly, for the asst. yr. 1969-70, return under s. 148 of the Act was to be filed on or before 16th Sep., 1974, but it was filed on 31st Oct., 1974. The assessee filed the Writ Petition before the Hon'ble High Court challenging the validity of the notices under s. 148 of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court issued notice to the Deptt., ....