TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (2) TMI 39
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax return within time for the assessment year 1979-80 was imposable on the assessee under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957?" For the assessment year 1979-80, the assessee was required to file the wealth tax return on or before July 31, 1979, but he failed to do so despite notice dated November 14,1981, issued under section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (for short, "the Act"), which provides for assessment of escaped wealth. He also did not respond to notices dated September 1, 1982, and December 16, 1985, issued under section 16(4) of the Act for production of records for the purpose of framing assessment. In the meanwhile, the Wealth-tax Officer, vide his letter dated January 21, 1984, asked the Departmental Valuation Offic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsideration for the purpose of assessing wealth because till the filing of return, the Wealth-tax Officer did not have the jurisdiction to make reference to the Valuation Officer under section 16A of the Act. The Tribunal then referred to section 17A(1)(b) of the Act and held that the Wealth-tax Officer did not have the jurisdiction to frame the assessment after the expiry of four years from the date of filing of the return or revised return. During the pendency of proceedings initiated against the assessee under section 25(2) of the Act, the Wealth-tax Officer issued notice dated February 1, 1988, to the assessee for levy of penalty under section 18(1)(a) of the Act. After considering the reply of the assessee, he imposed penalty of Rs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction and are cancelled. We also find force in the alternative submission of Shri Sharma that in returning the value of cinema building through the income capitalisation method, the assessee did not conceal any wealth or furnish inaccurate particulars of wealth within the meaning of section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act. Accordingly, all the three penalties stand cancelled." We have heard Shri Rajesh Bindal, learned counsel for the Revenue and Shri Suvir Sehgal, learned counsel for the assessee. Section 18(1)(a) of the Act empowers the Wealth-tax Officer etc. to impose penalty if the assessee fails to file a return in terms of sections 14(1) and 14(2) or 17 without any reasonable cause. The facts of the present case show that the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....imposed under section 18(1)(a) of the Act ignoring the fact that the assessee had not filed appeal against that part of the order. Shri Suvir Sehgal argued that even though the reasons assigned by the Tribunal for canceling the penalty imposed under section 18(1)(a) may not be legally sustainable, the levy of penalty should be declared illegal in view of circular No. 281/8/86-I.T. (INV. III) dated February 14, 1986, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. In our opinion, there is no merit in the argument of learned counsel. The circular, on which reliance has been placed by Shri Sehgal, reads as under: "In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (2) of section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961),....