The Income tax Officer determined the tax due from the assessee for the assessment year at Rs.
In appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner companyfirmed the order of the Income tax Officer.
Appeal by Certificate from the Judgment and order date June 26, 1969 of the Calcutta High Court in Income tax Reference No.
145 of 1966.
Sen, S. Sadhu Singh, J. M. Khanna and S. Ramachandran, the respondent.
C. Manchanda, T. A. Ramachandran, S. P. Nayar and R. N. Sachthey, for the appellant.
We are also number companycerned with the other objections taken by the assessee which were negatived by the Tribunal.
Thereafter a numberice under s.28 3 of the 1922 Act was served on the assessee on January 16, 1961.
The assessee failed to furnish its return within the extended time.
As under the provisions of s.297 2 g of the Act the proceedings for the imposition of the penalty had to be initiated and companypleted under the Act, a fresh numberice under s. 274 1 of the Act was served on the assessee.
497 of 1970.
V. Gupte, T. S. Viswanatha Rao and A. T. M. Sampat, for the intervener.
2,737/44 P. The companyclusion of the Tribunal was accepted as companyrect by the High Court.
January 17, 1961, the assessee filed its return for the assessment year in question.
In that regard the Income tax Officer issued a numberice under s. 22 2 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922 to be hereinafter referred to as the 1922 Act on June 1, 1960.
92,294/55 P. On the basis of that finding, it determined the penalty payable by the assessee at Rs.
Immediately thereafter the, assessee deposited Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by HEGDE, J. This appeal by certificate arises from the decision of the Calcutta High Court in a case stated by the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, B Bench, Calcutta.
On a further appeal, the Tribunal came to the companyclusion that the penalty under s.271 1 a i is to, be levied on the tax assessed minus the amount paid under the provisional assessment order namely Rs.
The Income tax Officer extended the time by two months and at the same time the informed the assessee that numberfurther time would be allowed.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL N0.
The same was served on the assessee on June 13, 1960.
In this case we are companycerned with the assesss assessment for the assessment year 1960 61, the relevant account year ending on December 31, 1959.
On July 18, 1960, the assessee moved for extension of time for submitting its return.
On the very next day viz.
The assessee objected to the validity of the numberice but that objection was overruled.
2,737/ .
Meanwhile on April 1, 1961 the Income tax Act, 1961 to be hereinafter referred to as the Act came into force.
Let us number proceed to state the facts relevant for deciding the point in issue, as companyld be gathered from the statement of the case.
The assessment was companypleted by the Income tax Officer only on October 31, 1962.
After setting out the relevant facts, the Tribunal solicited the opinion of the High Court on the following question of law Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that in calculating the penalty leviable under section 271 1 a of the Income tax Act, 1961 the amount paid by the assessee under the provisional assessment under section 23B of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922, was to be deducted from the amount of tax determined under section 23 2 of that Act in order to determine the amount of tax on which the companyputation of the penalty was to be based and in reducing the amount of the penalty imposed on the assessee to Rs.
12,7 3 4 IO P. At this stage it may be mentioned that on February 2,1961, a provisional assessment was made by the Income tax Officer under s. 23B of the 1922 Act.
That numberice required the assessee to submit its return on or before July 18, 1960.
92,294/55 P. In determining the penalty due from the assessee, the Income tax Officer took into companysideration number the amount demanded under s. 156 of the Act but the amount assessed under s. 143 of the Act.
1,25,512/10 P. and on that basis, the penalty payable by the assessee was fixed at Rs.
