TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (8) TMI 45
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ibunal has also submitted a statement of case with regard to the aforesaid question. The relevant assessment year was 1963-64. From the statement of the case, as stated by the Tribunal, it appears that the return of income was to be filed by the assessee on the 30th June, 1963, but it was actually filed on 31st January, 1964. Before the ITO the assessee had explained that it had from time to time filed petitions for extension of time for filing the return. The ITO came to the conclusion that the petition for extension of time had for the first time been filed on 4th September, 1963. He, therefore, held that the delay in filing the return was without reasonable cause and imposed a penalty of Rs. 30,000. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om September 4, 1963, were filed, but for the first time an application, which the assessee had filed on 28th June, 1963, i.e., before the due date, was also referred to. In support of this fact, the assessee filed the original of the petition duly received by the clerk of the department. The plea of the assessee was that as he had been filing various applications for time for filing the returns, which had not been rejected by the ITO, inasmuch as they had not been replied to the assessee was justified in presuming that its request for time had been accepted. It was also urged before the Tribunal that the delay in filing the return was bona fide, inasmuch as it could not be done earlier, because the audit was not complete. It was pointed ou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the ITO and, in such circumstances, the Tribunal could not hold that the department had established a case for the imposition of penalty. It is obvious, therefore, that all these were questions of fact and by taking them into consideration, the Tribunal, in disagreement with the ITO and the AAC, has come to the conclusion that the assessee had reasonable cause to file the returns on 30th January, 1964. The finding of the Tribunal is completely based on a consideration of facts. Therefore, the question referred to must be answered in favour of the assessee and against the department. As no one has appeared on behalf of the assessee, there will be no order as to costs. SINHA J.--I fully agree with my learned brother that the question must....