TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (12) TMI 118
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was no response by the assessee. In the circumstances, the Assessing Officer had imposed a penalty of Rs. 9,416, which was confirmed in appeal by the AAC. 3. In the appeal before us the learned counsel for the assessee has argued that the return of income could not be filed in time due to unavoidable circumstances. He has, however, submitted that the total tax payable by the firm came to Rs. 8,663 but the assessee-firm had paid advance tax and TDS amounting to Rs. 15,775. Thus a sum of Rs. 7,112 was refunded to the assessee. It was, therefore, argued that the advance tax and TDS was more than the firm's tax calculated on the income of the assessee and no tax was due on completion of the assessment and, therefore, penalty under section 271(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... within time by the due date. According to the learned Departmental Representative, the assessee fails to draw any support from the said decision. The learned Departmental Representative has also argued that the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Builders Engineers Co. can also not be applied inasmuch as, a decision to the contrary of the jurisdictional High Court is available. In this connection our attention was drawn to the case of Govindram & Co., the High Court of Bombay has held that penalty if imposed on the firm has to be calculated on the basis that it is an unregistered firm. It cannot be said that no penalty can be imposed on a registered firm because the penalty as calculated under the provisions of the latter p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing penalty on the assessed tax does not arise because no tax is actually due. It is also true that applying the ratio of this decision Bench 'D' of the Tribunal had decided similar issue in favour of the assessee in the case of Bombay Novelty Stores. However, we find ourselves unable to agree with the view canvassed by the assessee for the reasons given hereunder. 7. As already observed earlier, the question of imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(a) of the Act was not the subject of appeal before the Supreme Court in the case of Ganesh Dass Sreeram. That being so, the assessee, in our opinion, fails to derive any benefit out of the said decision particularly because a contrary decision of the Bombay High Court is available on the p....