P. Shanmugham, J. 1. The petitioner challenges exhibit P-6 order of the Commissioner of Income-tax confirming the order of the Assessing Officer levying penalty under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The conclusion of the Commissioner of Income-tax is on the basis that the explanation of the petitioner lacks bona fides.
2. The petitioner-firm ought to have filed a return on or before July 31, 1982. But the return was actually filed only on March 12, 1986, after a delay of four years. In spite of notice from the Department under Section 148 directing the petitioner to file the return, the return was even thereafter filed with a delay of 14 months. Therefore, there cannot be any dispute that there is an inordinate delay in filing the return. But now the only question is whether the petitioner has got any bona fide grounds for not filing the return. The explanation of the petitioner is that the firm has returned a total income of Rs. 1,88,260 for the year 1982-83 and the petitioner wanted to claim a deduction of a sum of Rs. 5,83,692 as loss incurred by Aiswarya Chitra, one of the partners of the petitioner-firm, from her individual business. The explanation of the petitioner that the accounts could not be finalised in time as the vouchers in the film production were not available, was found to be unacceptable since film production was not the business undertaken by the firm, but by the partners in their individual capacity. If the case of the petitioner is accepted, then they must be permitted to wait till the completion of the accounts of the partners of the firm so that the loss in the business of the individual capacity can be claimed against the income of the firm. This aspect has been considered both by the Assessing Officer as well as by the Commissioner of Income-tax and found to be not acceptable. I do not find any error in the reasoning of the authorities below.
3. Hence, no grounds are made out to interefere with the order. The original petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.