TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1979 (8) TMI 68
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he wealth-tax returns was up to January 13, 1967, and not till the date of filing the returns ? " The facts giving rise to the aforesaid question are as under : The assessment years concerned are 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67. The returns of wealth for the respective years were due on 30th June, 1964, 30th June, 1965, and 30th June, 1966. No return had been filed by the assessee-respondent under s. 14(1) of the Act till 12th December, 1966. Consequently, the WTO issued notice under s. 17 of the Act on the 12th of December, 1966, itself. The returns for the respective years, however, were filed on 6th October, 1969. The WTO then called upon the assessee to show cause as to why he should not be penalised under s. 18(1)(a) of the Act. The ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1967. The WTO was directed to calculate the penalty accordingly. The department being aggrieved by the decision of the AAC, appealed to the Tribunal and it was urged that the AAC was not justified in deleting the penalty for the period after 13th January, 1967. According to the department, the assessee had no right to file an application for extension of time after the expiry of the due date for the filing of return. It was, therefore, urged by the department that the applications filed on 13th January, 1967, were invalid and, therefore, they could not be taken into consideration by the AAC for interfering with the order of penalty. The Tribunal, while dismissing the appeals, observed that the assessee could not be debarred from applying ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e a mere academic importance, because if the assessee had a reasonable cause for default in filing the returns of wealth for a certain period, whether the law permitted him to file an application for extension of time or not, will be irrelevant. But even if it be assumed for the sake of argument that the application had been filed for extension of time beyond the statutory period, we do not think there is any law which debars an assessee from praying for extension of time for filing return of wealth after such statutory date. Learned counsel for the department has cited before us two decisions, one of the Andhra Pradesh High Court and the other of the Gauhati High Court to support his argument that the assessee was debarred from filing his....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t or the Rules made thereunder which requires the Income-tax Officer to pass an order on an application filed by an assessee subsequent to the time given to him for filing his return pursuant to a notice under sub-section (2) to section 139. The Income-tax Officer has to, apply his mind to the facts and circumstances, of each case and decide whether it was a fit case to grant extension of time or not. There is no hard and fast rule of universal application. " This case, therefore, is not at all an authority for the proposition set up by learned counsel for the department, that an assessee is debarred from seeking extension of time for filing return of wealth after the due date has expired. The Gauhati High Court in the case of Assam Fronti....