JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
2. Mr. Gargia, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that show-cause notice for imposition of the penalty under Section 18(1)(c) of the WT Act was not served. He further submits that in earlier years the Tribunal has deleted the penalty on this ground.
3. Tribunal has considered this aspect in para 2 of its order and found that notice dt. 20th Sept., 1994 has been served.
4. When the notice was served, there is no question of disturbing that finding in appeal.
5. The facts are also not in dispute that no wealth-tax return is filed though the assessee had the taxable wealth under the WT Act. A notice was issued. In response to that notice the assessee filed the return. There also be declared nil wealth claiming that property is used in the business. It was found by the WTO that one property is let out and not used for business and that wealth of the assessee is taxable. Total wealth was assessed to the tune of Rs. 14,04,845 in the asst, yr. 1988-89. That order of the WTO has been affirmed till the stage of Tribunal, which is final fact-finding body and that order of the Tribunal has not been challenged further.
6. Thereafter notice for penalty under Section 18(1)(c) has been issued and after considering the submissions, the penalty under Section 18(1)(c) has been imposed. That penalty has been affirmed uptil the stage of Tribunal.
7. When the assessee has concealed the facts for evading the tax and he later on, after notice, filed the return and wealth-tax has been charged finally, no justification has been shown why the penalty should not be levied and whether taxable wealth has been concealed or not is basically a question of fact. When fact-finding body, Tribunal has taken the view that it is a clear case of concealment of wealth to evade the tax, in our view, the finding on fact by the Tribunal is not perverse. No interference is called for.
8. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed at admission stage.