9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court was delivered by Rajesh Bindal J.—Following question of law has been referred for the opinion of this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short "the Tribunal"), arising out of its order dated April 29, 1988, passed in I. T. A. Nos. 632 and 633 of 1985, in respect of the assessment year 1978-79 : 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quired to pay advance tax by an order under section 210, if, by reasons of the current income being likely to be greater than the income on which the advance tax payable by him under section 210 has been computed or for any other reason, the amount of advance tax computed in the manner laid down in section 209 on the current income (which shall be estimated by the assessee) exceeds the amount of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e filed before the last date, i.e., March 14, 1978, as per the Income-tax Officer. The assessee filed the estimates of current income and advance tax as required under section 212(3A) of the Act on March 15, 1978. The Income-tax Officer held that the estimates having been filed beyond the time prescribed under the Act were invalid and, therefore, these were no estimates in the eyes of law. He, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inst the order of penalty before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Ludhiana (for short "the CIT(A)"), the assessee succeeded wherein the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that mere delay of one day in filing the estimate of advance tax was not deliberate but was beyond the control of the assessee. However, the Tribunal reversed the view taken by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch a situation, the estimate of advance tax filed by the assessee could not be declared to be invalid. Once a reasonable explanation is available and levy of penalty during the relevant period was envisaged in the absence of reasonable explanation, in our view, there was no justification for levy of penalty for mere technical default when the delay was merely of a day. 5. The question referred, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
