TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal Cancels Penalties for Failure to Pay Advance Tax</h1> <h3>Shree Govind Property And Investment Pvt. Limited. Versus Income-Tax Officer.</h3> Shree Govind Property And Investment Pvt. Limited. Versus Income-Tax Officer. - ITD 005, 390, TTJ 016, 460, Issues:1. Penalties levied under section 273(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for failure to pay advance tax.2. Interpretation of section 273(a) regarding penalties for failure to pay advance tax.3. Justification of penalties based on the provisions of the Act.4. Assessment of penalty for underestimation of advance tax liability.Detailed Analysis:1. The judgment deals with two appeals arising from penalties imposed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) under section 273(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for failure to pay advance tax. The penalties were confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and subsequently challenged by the assessee in the second appeal before the tribunal.2. The tribunal analyzed the provisions of section 273(a) and emphasized that penalties can only be imposed if the assessee knowingly furnished false information or failed to provide a statement of advance tax without reasonable cause. The tribunal noted that the penalties were solely based on the failure to pay advance tax, which does not align with the requirements of the section.3. The tribunal highlighted the specific provisions of the Income-tax Act related to default in payment of advance tax, such as sections 218, 220, and 221. It clarified that penalties under section 273(a) cannot be justified for mere failure to pay advance tax and that there are distinct procedures and penalties outlined in the Act for such defaults.4. Regarding the underestimation of advance tax liability by the assessee, the tribunal referenced a previous judgment by the Calcutta High Court to establish that penalties under section 273(a) require evidence that the estimate was knowingly false or the assessee had reason to believe it to be untrue. Since the ITO did not provide any evidence of the assessee's knowledge of the inaccuracy of the estimate, the tribunal concluded that the penalties could not be maintained.5. Ultimately, the tribunal allowed both appeals and canceled the penalties imposed on the assessee for failure to pay advance tax. The judgment underscores the importance of aligning penalties with the specific requirements of the Income-tax Act and the necessity of evidence to support the imposition of penalties under section 273(a).
TaxTMI 