1988 (2) TMI 112

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce-tax of Rs. 62,217 under s. 210 on the last assessed income of Rs. 2,94,006. The assessee, however, filed its own estimate of advance-tax on 27th Aug., 1975 estimating its current income subject to advance-tax at Rs. 80,000 and tax payable at Rs. 6,876. Income-tax was, however, returned at Rs. 1,11,409 and finally assessed at Rs. 1,72,105. Since the estimate filed by the assessee fell short of 7 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... filing of such estimate. Reliance in this connection was placed on the judgements of the Calcutta High Court reported in CIT vs. Birla Cotton Spg. Wvg. Mills Ltd. (1985) 155 ITR 448 (Cal) and Jeewanlal (1929) Ltd. vs. ITO (1981) 130 ITR 405 (Cal). He urged that on the date of filing the estimate, the estimate was based on certain material before the assessee and, therefore, it could not be said .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by it for the assessment year later than the assessment year on the basis of which notice was issued by the ITO. The assessee, therefore, could entertain a bona fide belief that its current income would not be more than Rs. 80, 000 particularly when the estimate was filed after 4-1/2 months of commencement of the accounting period. The assessee did not revise the estimate subsequently when came to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X