High CourtsDivision Bench(1990) 06 BOM CK 0034

Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs Ismail Ibrahim Amliwala

Bombay High Court · Decided on 7 June 1990 · Citation: (1990) 88 CTR 37 : (1990) 186 ITR 387 : (1990) 52 TAXMAN 79

HON’BLE JUDGES
T.D. Sugla, J · Sujata V. Manohar, J
CASE NUMBER
Wealth-tax Reference No. 131 of 1976

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 235 words

T.D. Sugla J.

1.

The only question of law referred to this court u/s 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, is :

"Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the penalty was levied on a dead person and hence was bad in law ?"

2.

Shri Ismail Ibrahim Amliwala had furnished the return of net wealth voluntarily for the assessment years 1965-66 to 1967-68. He died on January 30, 1968. For the assessment year 1968-69, the return of wealth was filed by his legal representative. However, penalty u/s 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, was imposed by the Wealth-tax Officer for the assessment year 1968-69 on March 20, 1973, on the deceased, Shri Ismail Ibrahim Amliwala, and not on his legal representative, Mohomed Ismail Amliwala, who had filed the return. Observing that the penalty was imposed on a dead person, following this court''s decision in Ellis C. Reid v. CIT [1930] 5 ITC 100, the Tribunal held that the penalty imposed u/s 18(1)(a) was bad and illegal.

3.

Shri Jetley, learned counsel for the Department, has not been able to satisfy us that the penalty was not imposed on a dead person. That being so, it must that the imposition of penalty was bad and illegal. Accordingly, the question is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.

4.

No order as to costs.