1990 (10) TMI 96

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arch, 1987. According to the ITO no reply was filed by the assessee. The ITO imposed penalty of Rs. 7,500. The assessee filed appeal before the AAC. It was submitted before the AAC that Form No. 6 seeking extension of time to file the return had been filed on 27th June, 1982 in which prayer for extension of time upto 31st Aug., 1982 had been made. It was further submitted that the assessee was a member of AOP of the same name of Bhavnagar and that he could not get information about his share of income from AOP in time and this was the cause for delay in filing the return. The AAC observed that the assessee had produced necessary evidence in support of the plea that Form No. 6 had been filed. He, therefore, held that there was reasonable cau....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessee to show cause notice, the penalty order is null and void cannot be accepted. The learned representative of the assessee has relied on two decisions of the Tribunal. In one of these decisions the assessee had bona fide belief that his income was below taxable limit. That was one of the reasons which was held to constitute reasonable cause for not filing the return. It is true that in that order reference was also made to the effect that ITO did not consider the reply. That was the additional reason. The other decision has followed an earlier decision of the Tribunal. I find that when the ITO initiated the proceedings, the initiation was with jurisdiction. Any irregularity that may creep in during the course of the proceedings would....