TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1981 (2) TMI 71
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0). The petitioner filed voluntarily his returns of wealth for assessment years 1970-71 and 1971-72 on November 28, 1972. It may also be noticed that the valuation was put by the petitioner reckoning it from March 31, 1970, and March 31, 1971, and the same was not accepted by the WTO-respondent 2. The assessments were concluded determining the total taxable wealth at Rs. 3,19,594 for 1970-71 and Rs. 1,92,852 for the assessment year 1971-72. He was required to pay tax in the sum of Rs. 1,598 for 1970-71 and Rs. 1,929 for 1971-72. In the course of the assessment proceedings, the 2nd respondent-WTO initiated penalty proceedings under S. 18(1)(a) of the W.T. Act (hereinafter referred to as " the Act ").. Penalty was being imposed only on acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... entire matter in a manner not permissible under law having regard to the special powers with which he was invested under s. 18B of the Act. Elaborating his contention, learned counsel pointed out that while the Commissioner accepted that the returns filed for the relevant assessment years were voluntary in character, that the petitioner had co-operated with the 2nd respondent for concluding the assessment and had also made arrangements to pay the admitted wealthtax, the Commissioner was bound to give relief under s. 18B of the Act. It is seen from the order of the Commissioner which is produced at Ex. F to the petition that the Commissioner found that the assessee had reasonable cause not to file the returns before the judgment of the S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... part of s. 18 prior to 1975 and was numbered as s. 18(2A) of the Act]. In the case of Shankara Apaya Swami v. WTO [1976] 103 ITR 649 (Kar), a learned single judge of this court had occasion to examine the scope of s. 18(2A) of the Act. It is superfluous for me to mention that s. 18B of the Act is completely in pari materia with s. 18(2A) of the Act in so far as it relates to this ambit of power to be exercised by the Commissioner. It is equally significant to notice that s. 18(1)(a) of the Act provides for the WTO to exercise the power to waive or reduce the penalty for belated filing of return if reasonable cause for the delay is shown. That order passed by the assessing authority is appealable under s. 23 of the Act before the AAC. It....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner has wrongly applied the provisions of the Act. The words appearing in clause (a) which are extracted above do not relate to the cause for the delay in filing the return. The question whether there was reasonable cause for filing the return beyond time arises for consideration under section 18(1)(a) itself and if the authority concerned is satisfied that there was reasonable cause for the delay then there would be no occasion to levy penalty and for invoking section 18(2A). It has, therefore, to be held that the words in question relate to the return which is filed beyond time without reasonable cause. If in that return the assessee has ' voluntarily and in good faith made full disclosure of his met wealth ' the condition mentio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner should take into consideration all other relevant factors while reducing or waiving the Penalty imposed or imposable under section 18(1)(a) of the Act. " . (Underlining is mine). What the learned judge has explained is the special nature of power to be exercised by the Commissioner which has no relation to the offer of a reasonable cause for delay in filing the return or suppression of wealth. The special power is conferred on the Commissioner in cases where the delay in filing the return or suppression of wealth itself is for unreasonable cause. Therefore, the Commissioner is required not to look into the reasonableness of the cause offered by the assessee but to the three factors mentioned in the section itself, that is, whether....