1981 (8) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e by it a Rs.5,98,500. The assessee paid the advance tax of Rs.1,86,815 on 16th Sep,1975 and Rs.4,11,685 on 18th Dec,1975 by a cheque dated 16th Dec,1975. 3. The assessee filed the return of its income at Rs.9,98,224. The assessment was completed on 15th Oct,1977 and the tax payable by it worked out to Rs.7,00,087. On appeal, the assessee got some relief and tax payable by it amounted to Rs.6,78,919. Since the amount of Rs.4,18,686 was paid by the assessee on 18th Dec,1975 and not on or before 15th Dec,1975, the ITO did not treat this amount as advance tax. He was also of the view that the estimate of advance tax filed by the assessee was untrue. He, therefore, initiated penalty proceedings against the assessee u/s 273 (a) of the IT Act,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f. He also submitted that the estimate filed by the assessee was not untrue and as such, the levy of penalty u/s 273(a) was not justified. The CIT(A) accepted the plea of the assessee and cancelled the penalty of Rs. 26,291. The department has, therefore, filed the present appeal. 5. After going through the record and hearing the ld. representatives of the parties, we do not find any good reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). It is common ground that the ITO has levied the penalty in question on the assessee u/cl. (a) of s. 273. Now, for imposing penalty under this clause, the ITO must prove that the assessee has furnished u/s 212 an estimates of advance tax payable him which he knew or had reason to believe to be untrue. Thi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the aforesaid order. The ITO held that the interest had been correctly charged and there was no mistake apparent from the record. He, therefore, rejected the application of the assessee. 8. On appeal the CIT(A) referred to his order in Appeal No. CIT(A)/V/CCIV-36/1980-81, wherein he had held that the amount of Rs.4,11,865 referred to above should be treated as "advance tax" and as such, no penalty was leviable on the assessee u/s 273 (a) of the IT Act, 1961. For the reasons given by the CIT(A) in the aforesaid order, he held that the assessee was entitled to get the adjustment of Rs.4,11,685 paid as advance-tax on 18th Dec,1975. He accordingly, directed the ITO to take into consideration this amount while levying interest u/s 139(8). Agg....