JUDGEMENT
Per Shri K.R.Dixit, Judicial Member - This appeal is one ground that the AAC erred in directing the Wealth-tax Officer to recompute the penalty imposable upon the assessee in accordance with law which prevailed on 30th March, 1981 instead of recomputing the same under the unamended section 18[1] [a] for the period of delay prior to 1-4-1976 and under that section as amended for the period of delay subsequent thereto. -
(1.)
(2.)For the asset, year 1975-76 the assessee filed return of wealth on 28th January, 1981 while it was due on 31st July, 1975. The WTO rejected the assessees explanation and held that he was not prevent by sufficient cause from filling the return within the time allowed. He, therefore, imposed the penalty under section 18[1] [a].
The AAC held the same view but he directed the WTO to recalculate the penalty applying the law as prevailing on date of initiation of penalty proceedings as decided by the Supreme Court in the case of May Punj v. CIT [1986] 157 ITR 330.
(3.)BEFORE us, the learned Departmental Representatives submitted that the penalty should be calculated in two part; one for the period prior to the amendment in 1-4-1976 and another for the period subsequent to that date. He relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court in CWT v. S. N. Tarawia [1988] 170 ITR 569 and the decision of the Patna High Court in the case of CIT v. Jagjit Kaur [1986] 162 ITR 844. He also submitted that if the law applicable on the date of the assessment order was to be applied then it may so happen that in some cases where although the delay might have occurred before the amendment of the law, the amended law would be applied because the assessment and taken place thereafter while in some cases the unamended law would be applied because the assessment had taken place prior to that date. This in his view would result in unfair and discriminatory treatment. On the other hand, the assessees Advocate submitted that this was a simple case of applying the Supreme Court decision in the case of Maya Rani Punj [supra] according to which the law applicable on the date of the assessment order had to be applied.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.