9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (2) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ), but failed to pay the tax as per such estimate ? (ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the interpretation of the provisions of section 217(1A) does not give scope for any controversy or debate and hence, if it is noticed that the levy of interest under the said section was contrary to law, the mistake can be rectified under section 154 ?" The assessment year in question is 1975-76. The assessee after paying the advance tax demanded, had also filed an estimate as the estimated income for the year was likely to exceed by 33 1/3 per cent. the amount of the advance tax paid. That estimate was filed as the assessee was required to file such an estimate under secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce tax as accords with his estimate on such of the dates applicable in his case under section 211 as have not expired, by instalments which may be revised according to sub-section (2) :" The proviso to section 212(3A) of the Act not being material, for the purpose of this case, it is unnecessary to refer to the same. Section 217(1A) which makes a reference to section 212(3A) of the Act provides that if a person who is required to file an estimate under that provision : ".... has not sent the estimate referred to therein, simple interest at the rate of twelve per cent. per annum from the 1st day of April next following the financial year in which the advance tax was payable in accordance with the said sub-section up to the date of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ying the further amounts payable as advance tax. The language employed in these two provisions is unambiguous and does not admit any doubt as to what the assessee is required to do, and as to what is permissible for the Income-tax Officer to do. The levy of interest on the amount of the advance tax which had not been remitted along with the estimate was, therefore, clearly an error committed by the Income-tax Officer and which error was apparent on the face of the record capable of being corrected under section 154 of the Act. Learned counsel for the Revenue fairly brought to our notice the decision of the Patna High Court in the case of CIT v. Bihar Journals Limited [1992] 198 ITR 458 wherein a similar view has been taken. Our answer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
