1980 (4) TMI 202

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee is an individual deriving income from partnership of four firms. For the asst. yr. 1974-75, the assessee had been served with a notice under s. 210 requiring payment of advance tax on estimated income of Rs. 33,130 which was the income assessed. Assessee, however filed the return for this asst. yr. (1974-75) showing an income of Rs. 63,850. Noting that the assessee had not filed an estima....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... evident that the assessee was not conscious of the increase in the firm of which he had a share and therefore the penalty imposed should be cancelled. 5. On the other hand, the Revenue relied on the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the assessee as a partner must be deemed to be conscious of the income arising from the firm. 6. On the consideration of the rival submissions,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the assessee was a partner of the firm, the fact that the firm did not file an estimate also indicates that the assessee was not conscious of the liability to file the estimate under s. 212 (3a). Secondly, that the fault of the firm is coextensive with the default of the assessee partner to the extent of the income of that firm and when the firm had suffered penalty for that default it would be un....