1995 (12) TMI 21

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ght in confirming the levy of penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal that the assessee had deliberately concealed the particulars of its wealth in spite of the fact that the impugned deposit was taxed twice over, once in the hands of the Hindu undivided family and then in the hands of an individual ? (iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the assessee had concealed the net wealth ignoring the material and/or evidence regarding the bona fide conduct of the assessee and as such the finding of the Tribunal is perverse and vitiated in law ? ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sponse to the said notice, on February 17, 1982, declaring net wealth at Rs. 2,62,787. The Wealth-tax Officer completed the reassessment of the Hindu undivided family determining the total wealth at Rs. 2,78,187. The Wealth-tax Officer also initiated proceedings for the levy of penalty under section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act, and levied penalty of Rs. 16,000 for the reasons stated by him in the order of penalty (annexure "A-2"). Aggrieved by the order of the Wealth-tax Officer, the assessee-applicant preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-tax, A-Range, who confirmed the levy of penalty by its order dated August 19, 1985, passed in Appeal No. WRO-40 of 1985-86 (annexure "A-3"). Aggrieved by the said....