INCOME TAX OFFICER v. T.S. GURUSWAMY
[Citation -1984-LL-0724-4]

Citation 1984-LL-0724-4
Appellant Name INCOME TAX OFFICER
Respondent Name T.S. GURUSWAMY
Court ITAT
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 24/07/1984
Assessment Year 1980-81
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags instalment of advance tax • condition precedent • regular assessment • mistake apparent • current income • tax payment
Bot Summary: The assessee was liable to file a statement of advance tax in conformity with the provisions of s. 209A for the asst. The ITO was of the view that these payments could not be treated as valid payments of advance tax for the purpose of s. 139(8) on the ground that t h e assessee had failed to file a statement of his advance-tax under s. 209A(1)(a) in Form No. 28A. The ITO accordingly levied interest of Rs. 4,039 ignoring these payments. The ITO rejected the assessee's application under s. 154 seeking to reduce the levy to Rs. 683 on the ground that since the assessee had failed to file From No. 28A the advance tax payment made of Rs. 48,000 was treated as an ad hoc payment only and hence it was not considered for the purpose of calculation of interest under s. 139(8). On the assessee's appeal against the ITO's order under s. 154 the Commissioner referred to the provisions of s. 209A(4) and held that it was clear that the filing of a statement under s. 209A(1)(a) is not a condition precedent to the filing of an estimate under s. 209A(4) and the assessee would be at liberty to file in lieu of the statement an estimate under s. 290A(4) which would discharge his obligation under s. 209A(1)(a). In this view the Commissioner held that the ITO should allow the assessee's application under s. 154 and allowed the appeal. The Department's contention before us is that there is no mistake apparent on the record which could be rectified under s. 154, since it requires long drawn process of reasoning. The ITO was bound to accede to the assessee's application under s. 154 to rectify his mistake apparent on the record viz.


This appeal by Department challenges Commissioner (A)'s order allowing assessee's appeal against ITO's order under s. 154, declining to reduce interest levied under s. 139(8), as urged by assessee. assessee was liable to file statement of advance tax in conformity with provisions of s. 209A for asst. yr. 1980-81 (financial year 1979-80). As on 15th Sept., 1979, date on or before which said statement should have been submitted latest assessment year in respect of which assessee had submitted his return was asst. yr. 1978-79 for which declared income was Rs. 72,650. On 14th Sept., 1979 instead of filing statement in Form 28A assessee filed estimate in Form 29, according to which he had estimated his income subject to advance tax at Rs. 91,750. This estimate was revised upwards to Rs. 1,10,820 in further estimate filed in Form 29 on 3rd March, 1980. There instalments of advance tax aggregating to Rs. 48,000 (Rs. 14,000 + 14,000 + 20,000) payable on basis of last estimate were paid by assessee. ITO was of view that these payments could not be treated as valid payments of advance tax for purpose of s. 139(8) on ground that t h e assessee had failed to file statement of his advance-tax under s. 209A(1)(a) in Form No. 28A. ITO accordingly levied interest of Rs. 4,039 ignoring these payments. ITO rejected assessee's application under s. 154 seeking to reduce levy to Rs. 683 on ground that since assessee had failed to file From No. 28A advance tax payment made of Rs. 48,000 was treated as ad hoc payment only and hence it was not considered for purpose of calculation of interest under s. 139(8). On assessee's appeal against ITO's order under s. 154 Commissioner (A) referred to provisions of s. 209A(4) and held that it was clear that filing of statement under s. 209A(1)(a) is not condition precedent to filing of estimate under s. 209A(4) and assessee would be at liberty to file in lieu of statement estimate under s. 290A(4) which would discharge his obligation under s. 209A(1)(a). In this view Commissioner (A) held that ITO should allow assessee's application under s. 154 and allowed appeal. Department's contention before us is that there is no mistake apparent on record which could be rectified under s. 154, since it requires long drawn process of reasoning. On due consideration we are unable to agree. In our view mere reading of provision makes it patent that assessee was right in filing estimate of his income in Form No. 29 and that payments made by assessee were indubitably advance tax payments under s. 209A. provisions read as under: "209A. Computation and payment of advance tax by assessee: (1) Every person shall, in each financial year, on or before date on which first instalment, o where he has not previously een assessed by way of regular assessment under this Act, on or before date on which last instalment of advance tax is due in his case under sub-section (1) of section 211, if his current income is likely to exceed amount specified in sub-section (2) of section 208, send to ITO. (A) where he has been previously assessed by way off regular assessment under this Act, statement of advance tax payable by him computed in manner laid down in cl. (a) or, as case may be, sub-cl. (i) of cl. (d) of subsection (1) of section 209 or (b) where he has not previously been assessed by way of regular assessment under this act, estimate of (i) current income, and (ii) advance tax payable by him on current income calculated in manner laid down in section 209 and shall pay such amount of advance tax, (4) in case of any assessee who is liable to pay advance tax under subsection (1) or sub-section (2) or, as case may be, sub-section (3), if, by reason of current income being likely to be greater than income on which advance tax so payable by him has been computed or for any other reason, amount of advance tax computed in manner laid down in section 209 on current income (which shall be estimated by assessee ) exceeds amount of advance tax so payable by him by more than 33/3 percent of latter amount, he shall, on or before date on which last instalment of advance tax is payable by him, send to ITO estimate of (i) current income, and (ii) advance tax payable by him on current income calculated in manner laid down in section 209, and shall pay such amount of advance tax...." above provision makes it clear that in case of any assessee to whom s. 209A(4) applies, he has to file only estimate of current income, when he is liable to pay advance tax under sub-s. (1). Thus assessee in present case, by filling estimate of his current income under section 209A(4), has fully discharged his obligation under s. 209A(1)(a) and has also paid advance tax accordingly. ITO was, therefore, bound to accede to assessee's application under s. 154 to rectify his mistake apparent on record viz. his treatment of advance payments as mere ad hoc payment. Having regard to foregoing discussion we would uphold Commissioner (A's) view. revenue's appeal is dismissed. *** INCOME TAX OFFICER v. T.S. GURUSWAMY
Report Error