NAURANGLAL CHIRANJILAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A statement of the case has been submitted, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench, Patna, under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be called is "the Act"), referring the following question for the opinion of this court:

(2.) THE relevant facts of the case can be culled out from the statement of the case. THE assessee is a firm and the assessment year involved is 1966-67.

(3.) MR. B.P. Rajgarhia, senior standing counsel for the Revenue, has submitted that the ITO actually meant to say that for non-compliance of the notice under Section 139(2) of the Act, the assessee was liable to imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(a) and so the ITO imposed penalty for delayed submission of the return under Section 139(1) and the AAC and the Appellate Tribunal upheld this imposition of penalty under Section 139(1) of the Act.