9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (2) TMI 126X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tiny of the assessment record of the assessee it was revealed that the interest under s. 217 was not charged in the case of the assessee for failure of the assessee to comply with the provision of s. 212(3) of the IT Act, 1961. It, therefore, appears that the order was erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Accordingly the order of the ITO was set aside by the CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income tax Tribunal. 5. We have heard the counsel of the rival parties and perused the material on record. It is submitted by the learned counsel of the assessee that the assessee had submitted its estimate under s. 212(3) of the IT Act, 1961. He, however, could not produce before us the receipt in support of the submission of the estimate by the assessee. He, however, has drawn our attention to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issued by the Department. The advance tax of Rs. 2,320, therefore, could have been paid only against the estimate under s. 212(3). Further, the ITO had also treated this amount as advance tax. Unfortunately the CIT's order passed under s. 263 is silent regarding the advance tax amounting to Rs. 2,320 paid by the assessee on 29th Dec., 1973. It might be that these facts had either escaped the notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
