1981 (6) TMI 94

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the show cause notice the assessee has merely stated that his previous auditor would have applied for extension of time for furnishing the return. According to the WTO this explanation was vague and unconvincing. In the absence of proof for filing application for extension of time he rejected the plea of the assessee and levied the penalty of Rs. 2,529. 3. On appeal before the AAC it was contended on behalf of the assessee that the case of the assessee was previously represented by another auditor and although he had handed over the files to the assessee, he had not handed over all the acknowledgements obtained for filing Form No. 6 applications. Therefore, it was urged that the delay should be condoned. However, the AAC found that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... under s. 14(2) specifically calling for the return of wealth for this year. There is no evidence on record for the assessee having applied for extension of time in response to the notice under s. 14(2) issued by the WTO. The assessee was not able to establish the fact of the previous representative having applied for extension of time for filing the return of wealth. Further the valuation of the immovable properties shown by the assessee was accepted, which is based on simple estimate on area of construction and the value of land. In this case the record show that the assessments 1961-62 to 1966-67 were all completed on the same date, namely, 7th March, 1967 under s. 16(1) of the WT Act accepting the net wealth shown by the assessee. The n....