HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 32 Case :- W.T.R. No. - 28 of 2000 Petitioner :- C.W.T. Respondent :- Hari Shanker, L/H Of Late Sri Ram Narain Petitioner Counsel :- Sc Respondent Counsel :- G.N. Srivastava,Shakeel Ahmad Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani,J.
Hon'ble Kashi Nath Pandey,J.
1. Heard Shri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel for the department.
2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1978-79 to 1981-82 in respect of proceedings for imposition of penalty under Section 18 (1) (a) and 18 (1) (c) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions of law under Section 27 (1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957 for the opinion of this Court:-
"1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in computing the period of limitation for imposing the penalties under Sections 18 (1) (a) and 18 (1) (c) of the W.T. Act with reference to the order dated 9.3.1987 of the I.T.A.T., which was subsequently quashed by the High Court?
2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the penalty orders dated 31.7.1991 were barred by limitation?"
3. Shri Shakeel Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for the department has filed paper book on 17.5.2011. He informs the Court that the same questions were referred by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad in WTR No.29 of 1998, Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Agra Vs. Shri Kripa Shanker, L/H of Late Badri Prasad, Etawah in which the Court after hearing the matter had answered both the questions in negative; in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.
4. The Court deciding the reference dated 15.7.2005 held that since in the case, of which the facts and the dates are the same, admittedly the order dated 9th March, 1987 passed by the Tribunal, was quashed by the High Court, vide judgment dated 25th July, 1989, after which the Tribunal had heard the appeal afresh and had passed a fresh order on 7th December, 1990, a copy of which was served upon the department in January 1991, (the dates are not in dispute), the limitation for passing of the order of penalty would start running from the end of the month of January, 1991. The penalty orders passed on 31st July, 1991 (within six months) as provided in Section 18 (5) (a) (ii) was thus within limitation. The Court held that the limitation of 6 months as provided under Section 18 (5) (a) (ii) of the Act will be computed from the end of the month in which the date of service of the order dated 7th December, 1990, fell. The order was served on the department in January, 1991 and thus penalty order dated 31st July, 1991 was well within time.
5. This reference is also decided accordingly. We answer both the questions referred to us in negative; in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.
Order Date :- 12.10.2011 nethra