COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX Vs. SENATKUMAR JAYANTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A penalty was imposed against an assessee in respect of the asst. year 1967 68, on the ground that there was a delay in filing the WT return. The assessee in fact had filed the return in his individual capacity within the prescribed time. Admittedly, there was no delay in the filing of the return in his individual capacity.

(2.) SUBSEQUENTLY , in view of some judicial pronouncement, the assessee was advised to file a separate return in respect of the ancestral property which had come into his hands which he was so far including in his individual returns as if it was his self acquired property. It was realised that under the law it was open to him to treat the ancestral property as property belonging to the HUF and to exclude it from his individual returns and file a separate return on behalf of the HUF. That is why he revised the original return filed by him which was filed within time, by excluding the ancestral property from his net wealth and filed a fresh return in his capacity as Karta of the HUF. Taking into consideration these facts, the Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'B' (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), came to the conclusion that there was sufficient cause for the late filing of the return having regard to the circumstances of the case. In our opinion, the view taken by the Tribunal is unexceptionable.