https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26819 The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the provisions of section 216 of the Income-tax Act were not attracted in the case. The court emphasized that the determination of underestimation of advance tax should be based on the tax liability revealed during regular assessment, not on revised estimates submitted during the year. As the regular assessment showed a tax liability lower than the advance tax paid by the assessee, the court held that the Commissioner's interpretation of section 216 was incorrect. The court answered the reference question in the affirmative, against the Revenue, and no costs were awarded. en-us Tue, 08 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Feb 2010 16:41:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26819 The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the provisions of section 216 of the Income-tax Act were not attracted in the case. The court emphasized that the determination of underestimation of advance tax should be based on the tax liability revealed during regular assessment, not on revised estimates submitted during the year. As the regular assessment showed a tax liability lower than the advance tax paid by the assessee, the court held that the Commissioner's interpretation of section 216 was incorrect. The court answered the reference question in the affirmative, against the Revenue, and no costs were awarded. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 08 Oct 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=26819