AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1973 (1) TMI 1
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, "B" Bench, Calcutta. After setting out the relevant facts, the Tribunal solicited the opinion of the High Court on the following question of law : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in calculating the penalty leviable under section 271(1)(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the amount paid by the assessee under the provisional assessment under section 23B of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, was to be deducted from the amount of tax determined under section 23(2) of that Act in order to determine the amount of tax on which the computation of the penalty was to be based and in reducing the amount of the penalty imposed on the assessee t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....As under the provisions of section 297(2)(g) of the Act, the proceedings for the imposition of the penalty had to be initiated and completed under the Act, a fresh notice under section 274(1) of the Act was served on the assessee. The assessee objected to the validity of the notice but that objection was overruled. At present we are not concerned with that objection. We are also not concerned with the other objections taken by the assessee which were negatived by the Tribunal. The Income-tax Officer determined the tax due from the assessee for the assessment year at Rs. 1,25,512.10 and on that basis, the penalty payable by the assessee was fixed at Rs. 12,734.10. At this stage it may be mentioned that on February 2, 1961, a provisional asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ax v. Hindustan Industrial Corporation. The Delhi High Court followed the decision of the Lahore High Court. On the other hand, it was urged by Mr. B. Sen, learned counsel for the assessee, and Mr. S. V. Gupte, learned counsel for the interveners, that on a proper interpretation of the provision mentioned earlier, it would be clear that the penalty can be only imposed on the amount payable under section 156. In support of their contention, they relied on the decision of the Mysore High Court in M. M. Annaiah v. Commissioner of Income-tax. They further urged that if the interpretation placed by the revenue on section 271(1)(a)(i) is accepted as correct, the result would be that the advance tax paid or taxes deducted at the source cannot be t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a)(i). The section, to the extent material for our present purpose, reads : "If the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in the course of any proceedings under this Act, is satisfied that any person--- (a) has without reasonable cause failed to furnish the return of total income which he was required to furnish...... by notice given under sub-section (2) of section 139...... or has without reasonable cause failed to furnish it within the time allowed and in the manner required...... by such notice...... he may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty--- (i) in the cases referred to in clause (a), in addition to the amount of the tax, if any, payable by him a sum equal to two per ce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tter part of that provision. It may be noted that the expression used is not "tax" but "the tax". The definite article "the" must have reference to something said earlier. It can only refer to the tax, if any, payable by the assessee mentioned in the first part of section 271(1)(a)(i). It is true the expression "tax" is defined in section 2(43) thus : "'tax' in relation to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1965, and any subsequent assessment year means income-tax chargeable under the provisions of this Act, and in relation to any other assessment year income-tax and super-tax chargeable under the provisions of this Act prior to the aforesaid date." 10. But the difficulty in this case is, as mentione....