TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (2) TMI 113
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by 2 days. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee filed petition for condonation of this delay stating the reason that this short delay was on account of wrong calculation of limitation period. Since the delay was negligible, we condone the same and dispose the appeal on merit. 3. A penalty of Rs. 1,000 was imposed by the ITO due to the default of non-submission of revised es....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....He, therefore, held that the assessee should have filed an estimate under s. 212 (3A) and paid the advance tax which he failed to do without reasonable cause. The AAC, therefore, held that the penalty was rightly levied in this case. 5. In the further appeal before us the learned counsel for the assessee, at the very, at the very outset, contended that the penalty order passed by the ITO was voi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot informed about the position of his share of estimated income from the respective firms, and that this provision being a new one and coming in the statue for the first time during the year under consideration, the assessee could not comply with the terms of the newly inserted s. 212(3A) of the Act. He, therefore, pleaded that the lower authorities failed to consider that there was reasonable cau....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid that notice was defective one, and that no valid notice was served on the assessee before imposition of penalty by the ITO. The law is settled by the decision of the Supreme Court in the cases of Kurban Hussain Ibrahimji Mithiborwala 32 ITR 821 (SC) and K. Adinarayana Murty 65 ITR 607 (SC) that if the notice issued by the ITO is invalid for any reason, the entire proceedings by him would becom....