9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (6) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eferred for our consideration under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in cancelling the interest levied under section 216 by following the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Addl. CIT v. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. [1980] 122 ITR 251 ?" The relevant assessment year is 1981 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0,21,000 76,98,666 17,86,200 18-3-1981 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- At the time of assessment, the Income-tax Officer held that the assessee's payment of the first instalment of advance tax was not in proportion to the actual income found ultimately. Therefore, he invoked section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him and thereby reduced the amount payable in either of the first two instalments. He proceeded to levy interest solely because the ultimate income found was not duly reflected in the advance tax paid in so far as the first instalment was concerned. The appeal filed by the assessee before the Commissioner failed. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, however, accepted the appeal and allowed the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all the estimates properly and made the payments of advance tax and in fact, the total advance tax paid by the assessee exceeded the tax assessed on the assessee. In the very nature of things, a business concern can only estimate the income that may be earned by the assessee. It is not possible to hold that the estimate of the income for the purposes of the first instalment was in any way opposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
