9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 89X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rlier years against the total income computed for the relevant assessment year, the taxable income would work out to nil and the assessee will not be liable to pay any tax in respect of this year. It is axiomatic that if there is no liability to pay income-tax, there is no obligation to pay advance tax and consequently no occasion for levy of penalty for non-payment of advance tax. In that view of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 273 of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1982-83. Admit. The following substantial question of law is framed for adjudication "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the levy of penalty of Rs. 70,000 under section 273 of the Income-tax Act, 1961?" With the consent of counsel for the parties we proceed to dispose of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid section. The penalty so levied was upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal has also affirmed the same, The sole ground on which the levy of penalty has been upheld by the Tribunal is that since the income finally assessed works out to Rs. 12,26,394, it was incumbent upon the assessee to file an estimate under section 212(3) and pay the advance tax accordingly, and, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that its total income for the relevant assessment year was nil after setting off the unabsorbed depreciation for the earlier years. The question whether the assessee is entitled to set off unabsorbed depreciation of earlier years against the income assessed under the head "Income from other sources" is the subject-matter of I.T.R. No. 505 of 1992 (Escorts Electronics Ltd. v. CIT (No. 1) [2002] 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of advance tax without any reasonable cause, particularly when the Tribunal has not gone into this aspect of the matter. In the light of our decision in the said reference, the impugned order of the Tribunal upholding the levy of penalty cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the question formulated above is answered in favour of the assessee/appellant. The appeal stands ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
