These appeals arise out of consolidated order o AAC who has confirmed penalties imposed by WTO for non-submission of return in time under s. 18(1) of Act. assessee did not file returns for asst. yrs. 1968-69 to 1972-73 as required under s. 14(1) of Act. returns were filed only on 19th Jan., 1978. WTO initiated penalty proceedings under s. 18 (1) (a) of Act and issued show case notice to assessee on 7th March, 1979 and case was fixed for hearing on 30th April, 1979. Further opportunity was allowed to assessee but assessee died on 13th June, 1980. explanation dt. 4th March, 1981 was subsequently filed before WTO but WTO did not find explanation as satisfactory and he imposed penalties of Rs. 10,280; Rs. 1,27,190; Rs. 97,160 and RS. 1,07,440 for asst. yrs, 1968-69 to 1972-73 respectively on dead person. legal representative came before AAC and contended that notice was issued on 7th march, 1979 which was received by legal representative on 31st march, 1979. As assessee died on 13th June, 1980, penalties imposed by WTO on dead person were illegal. assessee relied in Smt. Yawarunnissa Begum vs. WTO (1975) 100 ITR 645 (AP). assessee further indicated that even on merit assessee was prevented from treasonable cause. returnees could not be filed with reared to ownership of house property, further, assessee could not collect particulars of his house property in time. Both arguments of assessee were negative and penalties were confirmed. counsel of assessee only made submission on legal ground. It was stated that assessee died on 13th June, 1980 whereas penalties on dead person had been imposed by WTO vide his order dt. 7th March, 1981 which is illegal in view of he decisions in (1975) 100 ITR 645 (AP), Ramesh Prasad vs. CWT (1980) 17 CTR (All) 71: (1980) 124 ITR 77 (All), CWT vs. Varadarjan (1980) 122 ITR 1014 (Mad). & 35 CTR 360 (sic) . Shri chaliha, senior Departmental Representative on other hand, urged that though legal ground was taken by assessee but no specific finding has been given by AAC and, therefore, matter on this issue be set aside. Otherwise, it was urged that assessee and not argued on merit that he was prevented form reasonable cause and, therefore, penalties may be confirmed. assessee has argued only on legal point. penalty proceeding though were initiated while assessee was alive but penalty orders have been passed when assessee was dead. assessee died on 13th June, 1980 whereas penalty order have been passed by WTO, even after death on him on 7th March, 1981. assessee had cited various decision on basis of which it is clear that no penalty could be imposed on dead person. Under above circumstances penalty orders passed by authorities below are set aside and WTO is directed to refund penalties, if already collected. In result, appeals are allowed. *** SAIFUDDIN SK. SAFDERALLY v. WEALTH-TAX OFFICER