Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, for computing penalty under section 271(1)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the expression "the amount of the tax, if any, payable by him" refers to the tax assessed or the tax payable after deduction of amounts already paid, including payment under a provisional assessment under the 1922 Act.
Analysis: The provision was held to be capable of more than one reasonable construction. The expression "tax payable" was distinguished from "tax assessed", and the latter part of the section, using the words "the tax", was treated as referring back to the tax, if any, payable by the assessee earlier in the clause. Since the provision imposed a penalty, the ambiguity had to be resolved by adopting the construction favourable to the assessee. The Court also noted that the contrary interpretation would produce harsh results and that such consequences could not override the statutory language.
Conclusion: The penalty was to be computed on the tax payable after deducting the amount already paid, and not on the gross tax assessed. The question was answered in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The appeal failed because the statutory base for penalty under section 271(1)(a)(i) was held to be the tax payable, not the mere tax assessed, and the earlier payment had to be taken into account.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a penalty provision in a taxing statute is reasonably capable of two constructions, the interpretation favourable to the assessee must be adopted, and "tax payable" must be distinguished from "tax assessed" for computing the penalty base.