1995 (9) TMI 52

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Bench " B ") has, under section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, referred the following question stated to be of law and to arise out of its order dated May 10, 1979, passed in W. T. A. No. 756/(Delhi) of 1977-78 for the assessment year 1967-68 for the opinion of this court : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the pena....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Assistant Commissioner failed. On second appeal, however, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal held that the penalty was leviable according to the law as it was in force on the date when the return was due. This controversy has since been settled by the decisions of the Supreme Court in Maya Rani Punj v. CIT [1986] 157 ITR 330 and CWT v. P. N. Banerjee [1991] 192 ITR 399. In Maya Rani Punj's cas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Wealth-tax Act and for the period thereafter, on the basis of the amended provisions. The same view was taken by this court in CWT v. Smt. Brij Rani [1993] 201 ITR 307 in which dealing with the assessment years 1967-68 and 1968-69, this court held that the penalties under section 18(1)(a)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act were to be levied for the period of delay prior to April 1, 1969, in terms of the pre....