1996 (8) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 1978-79. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to respondent No. 1 to deal with the application of the petitioner under section 18B of the Act, in accordance with law. We have heard Sri A. M. Mahajan, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the Revenue. The petitioner filed returns of wealth for the assessment years 1974-75 to 1978-79 on December 22, 1979. All the returns were, thus, delayed and attracted penalty under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), at the rate of two per cent. of the assessed tax for every month during which the default continued. The assessments for all the aforesaid years were made. For the assessment year 1974-75, th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lfilled and the Commissioner must have considered the petitioner's application for waiver or reduction of the penalty on the merits. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the notices under section 17 were issued on December 6, 1979, for the assessment years 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79, and the assessee avoided the service thereof. It is alleged that notices were sent by registered acknowledgment due post also, and the postman tried to effect service on December 21, 1979 and December 22, 1979. It is, therefore, contended that the returns were not voluntary. Under section 18B of the Act, the power is conferred on the Commissioner of Wealth-tax to waive or reduce the penalty levied under section ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... India for these three years. However, as far as the assessment year 1975-76 is concerned, the amount of penalty levied is Rs. 8,060, and, admittedly no notice under section 17 of the Act was issued by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, for that year, it cannot be said that the assessee had not voluntarily and in good faith made true and full disclosure of net wealth prior to the issue of notice to him. There is no averment that the petitioner has not co-operated in the enquiry relating to assessment of his net wealth or has not paid the tax levied on him. In our view, therefore, so far as the assessment year 1975-76 is concerned, the petitioner had fulfilled the pre-conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction by the Commissioner under....