1990 (10) TMI 100 - AT - Income Tax

Central Government, Failure To Pay Advance Tax, False Estimate, Financial Year, Interest Income

Summary

Issues: Penalty under section 273(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act for reducing income tax payable by amount representing tax deductible at source on interest income.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves four appeals by the department concerning the assessment year 1982-83, being decided together.
2. The specific issue in focus is related to ITA No. 2595(Ahd.)/1987 concerning Delwada Investments Pvt. Ltd.
3. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated proceedings under section 273(2)(a) of the Act, contending that the assessee wrongly reduced income tax payable by the amount representing tax deductible at source under section 194-A on interest income.
4. The AO argued that since the tax was not actually deducted at source by the payer company in the relevant financial year, the assessee should be penalized for filing an untrue estimate of advance tax.
5. The AO imposed a penalty under section 273(2)(a), which was later canceled by the CIT (Appeals), leading to the department's appeal before the tribunal.
6. During the hearing, the AO highlighted that the tax on interest income was not deducted and paid to the government by the payer company until several months after the end of the financial year.
7. However, the tribunal rejected the AO's argument, emphasizing that the assessee's obligation was to estimate current year income and calculate advance tax based on the rates in force during the financial year.
8. The tribunal explained that the assessee correctly reduced income tax by the amount deductible at source on interest income, as per the provisions of section 209 of the Act.
9. The tribunal clarified that the assessee's knowledge or belief regarding the subsequent deduction and payment of tax by the payer company was irrelevant at the time of filing the estimate.
10. The tribunal concluded that the penalty provisions under section 273(2)(a) were not applicable as the assessee did not file an untrue estimate of advance tax, thereby upholding the CIT (Appeals) decision to cancel the penalty.
11. The judgment highlighted that the identical facts in other appeals led to the same reasoning and outcome, resulting in the dismissal of all appeals.