TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (7) TMI 83
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gistered firm and the assessment year is 1969-70. The return of income was due to be filed by it in respect of the assessment year on or before June 30, 1969. A notice under s. 139(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), was served on the assessee on July 3, 1969. Inspite of this and several other notices that were issued under s. 142(1) of the Act, the return was filed on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the penalty by applying the provision of section 271(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is valid in law?" In so far as the first question is concerned the contention of the assessee is that since interest had been levied under cl. (iii) of the proviso to s. 139(1) of the Act, the ITO must be deemed to have condoned the delay in filing the return and hence no penalty was leviable under s. 271(1)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all apply in every such case; (b) the period referred to in clause (a) shall be-... (iii) where the return relates to a previous year relevant to any other assessment year, two years from the end of such assessment year." In the instant case it is not the case of the assessee that it had in fact made an application for extension of time to file the return and time had been extended. The pres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r cl. (b) of s. 183, then notwithstanding anything contained in the other provisions of this Act, the penalty imposable under sub-s. (1) shall be the same amount as would be imposable on that firm if that firm were an unregistered firm. The contention of Sri S. P. Bhat, learned counsel for the assessee, is that sub-s. (2) of s. 271 of the Act would be applicable only when the registered firm its....