Sec. 17A & 18(1)(c) of Wealth-tax Act, 1957 — Penalty - The challenge in the Appeal is to the order passed by the Tribunal, which confirmed the order of CIT(A), remanding the matter to the WTO for re-examination and reassessment after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Both the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal held that Expln. 3 to s. 18 of the WT Act is attracted. This is on the basis that for the asst. yr. 2003-04, the reassessment notice was issued to the appellant prior to the appellant filing its returns. No doubt, the Tribunal observed that the issue of limitation was never raised by the appellant in its reply. The observation made in the order that Expln. (3) to s. 18 of the WT Act is applicable, is really a prima facie observation. This is clear from the fact that both the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal have directed the WTO to re-examine the matter, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant herein. The Tribunal observed that the issues raised in the matter require investigation of facts. No reason is found to interfere with the impugned orders and revoke the remand order by the CIT(A) and by the Tribunal. The WTO will have to investigate into the factual aspect and will have to re-examine the matter and thereafter, conclude whether the period of limitation, as prescribed under s. 17 of the WT, is indeed attracted in this case, in the light of Expln. 3 to s. 18 of the WT Act. The issue as to whether, Expln. 3 to s. 18 of the WT Act, is attracted or not, is a mixed question of law and facts and therefore, the WTO will have to consider this issue as well. Appeal disposed of accordingly. - EDC LTD. V/s CWT - [2020] 315 CTR 760 (BOM)