JUDGMENT V.N. Khare, J.
1. This is a reference under Section 27, Sub-section (3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), at the instance of the Revenue. The question referred for the opinion of this court is as follows :
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the view of the Tribunal that the relevant date for purposes of imposition of penalty under section 18(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, is the date when the return is actually due is legally unjustified ?"
2. To give the factual background of this case, the assessee is an individual. According to the Wealth-tax Officer, she should have filed her return of total wealth for the relevant year by June 30, 1964, but she did not file the return within time. Accordingly, a notice under Section 17 of the Wealth-tax Act was issued to her on February 8, 1972, and in response thereto the assessee filed a return on November 29, 1972, showing a total wealth of Rs. 1,57,124. The Wealth-tax Officer initiated penalty proceedings for this default and issued a show-cause notice to the assessee. The assessee's case before the Wealth-tax Officer was that she had no idea that her wealth for 1964-65 was taxable and further she had no mala fide intention because for the year 1965-66 and the subsequent years she filed returns voluntarily. The Wealth-tax Officer did not accept these submissions and imposed a penalty of Rs. 17,486. The Wealth-tax Officer computed penalty for the period July 1, 1964, to March 31, 1969, under the provisions of law as in force before the date of amendment which was made from April 1, 1969, for the period thereafter under the amended provisions. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who confirmed the order of the Wealth-tax Officer. On further appeal, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as well as of the Wealth-tax Officer and held that the maximum penalty which would have been imposed when the default occurred was for a period of 25 months. The Tribunal was of the view that the default occurred on June 30, 1964, and under the provisions then in force the maximum penalty could be 50 per cent. of the tax, that is, it could be imposed for a period of 25 months of default only. In view of this, the Tribunal directed the Wealth-tax Officer to compute the penalty accordingly. An identical question came up before this court for consideration in the case of CWT v. Smt. Brij Rani [1993] 201 ITR 307. In this case, this court was of the view that the penalty under Section 18(1)(a)(i) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, for the delay in filing the returns for the assessment years in question is to be levied for the period of delay prior to April 1, 1969, in terms of the prescribed rates with reference to the unamended Section 18 of the Act as it stood prior to its amendment by the Finance Act, 1969, and for the period of delay subsequent to April 1, 1969, at the prescribed rates in terms of law under the amended Section 18(1)(a) as it stood after its amendment effected thereto by the Finance Act, 1969. In view of the decision of this court, we answer the question referred above in the negative and against the assessee. Since none has appeared on behalf of the assessee, there shall be no order as to costs.