2003 (8) TMI 201 - AT - Income Tax

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against penalty under section 273(1)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 for asst. yr. 1987-88.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed by the assessee against the penalty of Rs. 96,737 under section 273(1)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1987-88. The issue revolved around the assessee's failure to furnish the statement of advance tax or statement in lieu of such statement. The assessee's argument was based on a bona fide belief that due to carry forward of losses, the income for the relevant year would be below the taxable limit, thus exempting them from filing the estimate. However, the AO and CIT(A) held that the latest assessed income of Rs. 13,52,370 for the assessment year 1983-84 should have been the basis for filing the statement. Consequently, the penalty was imposed and upheld by the lower authorities.

2. The Departmental Representative contended that the penalty was justified as per the provisions of the IT Act. They emphasized that the obligation was to file the statement based on the latest assessed income, which in this case was for the assessment year 1983-84. The argument was made that even if a loss return was filed for the subsequent year, it did not exempt the assessee from filing the estimate based on the latest assessed income. Therefore, the penalty imposition by the AO was deemed appropriate.

3. On the other hand, the Authorized Representative of the assessee relied on a decision of the Bombay High Court to support their argument. They highlighted that the failure to submit the statement as required by the Act could lead to the levy of interest and penalty. The contention was that since the returned income for the relevant year was a loss, the assessee genuinely believed there would be no tax liability due to the carried forward losses. Thus, the estimate of tax was not filed under section 209A(1)(a) in good faith.

4. After reviewing the arguments and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal found that the assessee had filed a return of loss for the relevant year and genuinely believed there would be no tax liability. The subsequent increase in income exceeding the non-taxable limit was due to unforeseen rebates and adjustments. Considering these factors, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee acted in good faith and was not required to file the advance tax estimate. Therefore, the penalty of Rs. 96,737 was set aside, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.