9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (11) TMI 14X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng that the assessee was not under an obligation to file an estimate in terms of section 212(3A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and was not liable to pay any interest under section 217(1A) of the said Act ? " The assessee, M/s. Golcha Properties (P.) Ltd., is a private limited company in liquidation. While filing its return of income-tax for the assessment year 1971-72, it claimed that it had no income and, accordingly, in Part I of the return nil income was shown. But, in Part IV of the return, the assessee declared an income of Rs. 12,94,515 which was claimed to be exempt. The Income-tax Officer, however, brought the entire income of the company in liquidation to assessment and he made a note to the following effect : " No action under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee, the Commissioner of Income-tax passed the impugned order to the following effect : " I have considered the various contentions raised in the written reply. The assessee has not indicated that any circumstances exist for the waiver of interest in terms of rule 40 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. There is also nothing on record to indicate that at the time of making the original assessment, the Income-tax Officer had taken any conscious decision to waive interest under section 217(1A). The assessment is, therefore, clearly prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The same is accordingly cancelled and the Income-tax Officer is directed to make fresh assessment after applying his mind to the qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee has placed reliance on CIT v. N. Khan and Brothers [1973] 92 ITR 338 (All), CIT v. Allied Silk Mills [1983] 140 ITR 428 (Bom), CIT v. Bharat Machinery and Hardware. Mart [1982] 136 ITR 875, (Guj) and CIT v. Ajit Singh Bhagat Singh [1985] 151 ITR 696 (Raj), a Division Bench judgment of this court and CIT v. Hazari Mal Milap Chand Surana [1987] 163 ITR 531 for the proposition that the assessee cannot be held guilty and was right in not disclosing the income of the assessee-company, being under liquidation, as an income assessable under the Act under a bona fide belief and, therefore, he was not liable to any interest. We are in agreement with the view expressed by this court in the earlier two cases cited above. Therefore, the que ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
