High Court directs Tribunal on penalty validity & filing date in a wealth return caseJudge(s) : B. N. KIRPAL., C. L. CHAUDHARY JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by B. N. KIRPAL J. -Heard. In our opinion, the following two questions of law arise in this, case and the same should be referred : "1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the levy of penalty under section 18(l)(a) to the tune of Rs. 18,100 ? 2. Whether the Tribunal is right in coming to the conclusion that the return of wealth w... ... ... Case: 1989 (7) TMI 45 - DELHI High Court
Judges: B. N. KIRPAL, C. L. CHAUDHARY
The court identified two questions of law:
1. Validity of penalty under section 18(1)(a) of Rs. 18,100
2. Filing date of wealth return by assessee as January 31, 1973
Tribunal instructed to refer these questions to the court. Reference, Wealth Tax Brig. Gurbux Singh Versus Commissioner Of Wealth-Tax
Wealth-tax
1989 (7) TMI 45 - DELHI High Court - [1990] 181 ITR 185
DELHI High Court - HC
Dated:- 31-7-1989
- - -
Wealth tax
Judge(s) : B. N. KIRPAL., C. L. CHAUDHARY JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by B. N. KIRPAL J. -Heard. In our opinion, the following two questions of law arise in this, case and the same should be referred : "1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in upholding the levy of penalty under section 18(l)(a) to the tune of Rs. 18,100 ? 2. Whether the Tribunal is right in coming to the conclusion that the return of wealth was filed by the assessee on January 31, 1973 ?" The Tribunal should state the case and refer the aforesaid questions of law to this court.
Case laws, Decisions, Judgements, Orders