9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (10) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax according to the demand of the Assessing Officer under section 210 and filed an estimate on 15-6-79 showing the tax payable at Rs. 38,70,000 on the income of Rs. 60,00,000 and accordingly paid the instalment of Rs. 12,90,000 each on 14-6-79 and 15-9-79. The Palekar Tribunal constituted by the Govt. of India was considering the salaries and wages payable to journalists and non-journalists newspaper employees. After considering the sittings and discussions with the Palekar Tribunal the assessee was of the opinion that on the award of the Palekar Tribunal a huge liability for salaries and wages will fall back upon the assessee and consequently the assessee on 13-12-79 filed another estimate showing the tax payable at Rs. 25,73,550 which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal was given only in August. 1980 and, therefore, it was difficult for the assessee to estimate the liability according to the Palekar Tribunal and he confirmed the penalty. 4. Shri Levi, the Counsel of the assessee, filed the explanation offered before the Assessing Officer and a small statement showing the tax paid by the assessee as well as the shortfall and relying on CIT v. S.B. Electric Mart (P.) Ltd. [1981] 128 ITR 276 (Cal.), CIT v. Birla Cotton Spg. & Wvg. Mills Ltd. [1986] 157 ITR 516 (Cal.) and CIT v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [1989] 179 ITR 101/46 Taxman 108 (Cal.) urged that the estimate filed by the assessee was bona fide and fair and, therefore, no penalty should have been sustained by the CIT (Appeals). The Counsel stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e tax of Rs. 25.80 lakhs in two instalments. Thereafter, the assessee revised its income as well as the tax payable for the year on 13-12-79. The assessee estimated the income for the year at Rs. 39.90 lakhs and the tax payable thereon at Rs. 25.73 lakhs. The total income of the assessee for the year was ultimately assessed at Rs. 62.59 lakhs. The assessee has taken the plea that the first estimate was filed showing the income of Rs. 60 lakhs and thereafter the assessee was expecting the liability of about Rs. 20 lakhs on the Award of the Palekar Tribunal for the salaries and wages of journalists and non-journalists newspaper employees and consequently revised the estimate. It is a fact that the Palekar Tribunal was appointed to determine t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ages of journalists and non-journalists newspaper employees. Therefore, even though the Palekar Tribunal gave its proposal only in August 1980, the estimate of the liability by the assessee after watching the progress of the Tribunal's working could not be said to be untrue or unfair. If the conduct of the assessee is judged with reference to the progress of the Palekar Tribunal's working, the second estimate filed by the assessee was also bona fide and fair. Under the said circumstances it was not fair to impose the penalty upon the assessee. The same view has been taken in the cases cited by the assessee. Consequently, the penalty order passed by the assessing Officer is cancelled. The assessing Officer is directed to refund the penalty, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
