Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1995 (9) 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

..... ,000. A revised estimate was filed on 11-3-1983 estimating the income at Rs. 40,000. However, the income returned was Rs. 73,940 which was accepted by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) subject to rectification under section 155 adopting correct share income from the firms. Thus, the returned income and the assessed income was higher than the income shown in the estimate. In fact, the assessee has received a notice for payment of advance-tax amounting to Rs. 31,870 on total income of Rs. 81,400. However, in response to the same, the assessee has filed a lower estimate by estimating the income at Rs. 30,000 as mentioned earlier. The Assessing Officer thereupon issued a notice under section 274/273 dated 25-10-1985 to the assessee. In .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... herein, in the blank places, the name of the assessee, GIR No., assessment year and the date and time for representation before him were mentioned. The last paragraph in the first page of the said notice was marked with an asterisk indicating that the provisions contained in that paragraph are not applicable to the assessee. The said paragraph reads as under : " furnished under sub-section (2)(3) of section 18-A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, or under section 212 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, estimate (s) of advance tax payable by you for the assessment year.... which you knew or had reason to believe to be untrue." However, at page 2 of the said notice, the first paragraph was ticked indicating that the notice was issued under the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eviable under a different sub-section of section 273 for short payment. However, without specifying as to which sub-section or provision applies to the issue on hand. The Ld. counsel contended before us that the notice having not been specific as to under which provision/sub-section the penalty is sought to be levied, the initiation of proceedings itself is invalid in law. Even otherwise, the penalty order, having specifically mentioned the section under which the penalty is sought to be levied by the Assessing Officer, is invalid because the assessee has furnished an estimate and also a revised estimate under section 212(3A) and, therefore, there is no failure on her part of file an estimate as envisaged under section 273(2)(c) of the Act. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... section 274/273 of the Act and also the order of the Assessing Officer under section 273(2)(c) of the Act, it is very clear that the penalty is sought to be levied under an incorrect provision which is not applicable to the facts of the assessee before us. Thus, the jurisdiction assumed by the Assessing Officer in calling for the explanation for the levy of penalty is incorrect. The notice does not specify as to under which section or subsection the penalty is sought to be levied so that she could explain the reasons therefor. As already mentioned above, section 212(3) of the Act which is the basis for levy of penalty as per the said notice is no longer on the statute book as the same is omitted w.e.f. 1-6-1978. The illegality is compounded .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sentative is distinguishable on facts. In that case their Lordships dealt with technical mistake i.e. as against full signature, the officer has put his initial. At any rate, even going by the approach of the first appellate authority, the penalty, if any, is leviable for wilful short payment of the advance tax. However, penalty proceedings under section 273 of the Act being quasi-criminal in nature, the Assessing Officer cannot impose penalty without giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee, of being heard, on the alleged wilful short payment of advance tax. On a perusal of the facts and material placed before us, we find that no such opportunity was given to the assessee. In fact, the show-cause notice itself is sketchy. Thus, the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates