1989 (9) TMI 154 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of penalty calculation under section 271(1)(a) of the IT Act for a registered firm.
2. Applicability of the decision in Ganeshdass Sreeram case to penalty calculation.
3. Comparison of provisions of sections 139(8) and 271(1)(a) of the IT Act.
4. Determination of penalty when tax deducted at source exceeds the assessed tax for a registered firm.

Analysis:

The case involved a reference sought by the CIT, Orissa, regarding the calculation of penalties under section 271(1)(a) of the IT Act for a registered firm. The firm had delayed filing returns for multiple assessment years, leading to penalties being levied by the ITO. The penalties were computed treating the firm as an unregistered firm. The assessee appealed to the AAC but was unsuccessful. The Tribunal, however, set aside the lower authorities' order and directed the ITO to determine if taxes deducted at source exceeded the assessed tax, following the decision of the Rajasthan High Court.

The assessee contended that no penalty was leviable under section 271(1)(a) as tax deducted at source exceeded the assessed tax and refunds were granted. The Tribunal, considering the decisions in Ganeshdass Sreeram case and the Rajasthan High Court case, held that if tax deducted at source was more than the assessed tax, the delay in filing returns did not cause any loss to the Revenue. The Tribunal declined to refer the matter to the High Court, stating that the answer was self-evident based on the decisions cited and the similarity in provisions of sections 139(8) and 271(1)(a) of the Act.

The Tribunal emphasized that the decision in Ganeshdass Sreeram case, although under section 139(8), was applicable to section 271(1)(a) as the provisions were similarly worded and aimed at the same objective. The Tribunal rejected the reference applications, indicating that penalties might be levied only if the assessed tax was found to be more than the tax deducted at source. The decision highlighted the importance of determining the facts before imposing penalties on a registered firm in such cases.