1976 (9) TMI 21

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the same time interest under the proviso to section 139 had also been imposed ?" The facts necessary for the understanding of the above question are as follows: The case relates to two assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67. For the first assessment year, the income-tax return was due on September 30,1965, but the same was filed on July 1, 1967, i.e., after a delay Of about 21 months. For the second assessment year, the return was due on September 30, 1966, but the same was filed on October 17, 1967, i.e., after a delay of about 12 months. The Income-tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings against the assessee under section 271(1)(a) of the Act and levied penalty of Rs. 5,704 for the former year and Rs. 5,334 for the latter year. The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on 139 or by notice given under sub-section (2) of section 139 or section 148 or has without reasonable cause failed to furnish it within the time allowed and in the manner required by sub-section (1) of section 139 or by such notice, as the case may be,....... he may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty,-- (i).... in addition to the amount of the tax, if any, payable by him, a sum equal to two per cent. of the tax for every month during which the default continued, but not exceeding in the aggregate fifty per cent. of the tax......" Thus, it will be seen that this provision attracts the liability to penalty in two circumstances: one is, failure to furnish the return itself without reasonable cause and the second is,....