TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 815X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. 2. The assessee/writ petitioner herein is a Trust. For the Assessment Year 1989-90 to 1991-92, the petitioner claimed exemption under Section 11(4A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. However, the same was denied and demand was raised on the entire income. The petitioner challenged the orders of assessment before this Court. By order dated 19.12.1994, this Court allowed the writ petitions and quashed the orders of assessment dated 20.3.1992, 22.12.1992 and 19.4.1993 relating to the assessment years 1989-90, 1990-91 and 1991-92. Thereupon, the assessing officer passed fresh orders of assessment and declared the assessee as not assessable. 3. In the meantime, the revenue preferred appeals against the orders of this Court reported in 21 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e contended that after the order passed on 19.12.1994 declaring the assessee as not assessable, the fresh order of assessment passed could not be viewed as restoring the original order. Consequently, the order passed on 31.12.1996 superseded the earlier order of assessment. In the circumstances, with no liability to pay tax till the Apex Court reversed the decision of this Court, the benefit of the notification applied in full force to grant the waiver. 6. The petitioner submitted that the first respondent went wrong in not considering the notification and the facts in the proper perspective and went wrong in denying the benefit on extraneous reasons. 7. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the records ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned junior standing counsel for the respondent. 9. A perusal of the order impugned shows that this Court granted stay of the operation of the assessment orders challenged in the writ proceedings preferred by the petitioner. Subsequently, by orders dated 6.1.1989 and 12.6.1989 and by order dated 19.12.1994, this Court allowed the writ petition, thereby granted the exemption. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that after the order of this Court quashing the assessment, as reported in the decision reported in 213 ITR 626 (THANTHI TRUST Vs. ASSISTANT CIT) and 213 ITR 639 (THANTHI TRUST Vs. C.BD.T.), the second respondent passed fresh orders on 31.12.1996 thereby declaring the petitioner as nil assessment . Howeve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the relevant previous year, certain receipts which were hitherto treated as exempt, become taxable. Since no advance tax would normally be paid in respect of such receipts during the relevant financial year, penal interest is levied for the default in payment of advance tax; (v) Where the return of income is filed voluntarily without detection by the Income-tax Department and due to circumstances beyond the control of the taxpayer such return of income was not filed within the stipulated time-limit or advance tax was not paid at the relevant time. 11. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner emphasized on Clauses 4 and 5 of the Board's circular and pleaded that the first respondent had not considered the two clauses wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
