COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. K M WADHWANI CONTRACTOR
LAWS(IT)-1994-2-22
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on February 17,1994

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

R. SWARUP, J. M. : - (1.) THE CIT, Jabalpur, has made these reference applications under s. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, and he has proposed the following questions of law stated to be arising out of the orders of the Tribunal dt. 14th Oct., 1992, in ITA Nos. 331 to 334/Jab/1992 for the asst. yrs. 1988-89 and 1989-90 to refer the same for the opinion of the Honble High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur. THE questions of law proposed in RA No. 1 and 2/Jab//1993 for the asst. yrs. 1988-89 and 1989-90 are as under : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law to infer that Assessing Officer failed to examine from his record as to whether the income in any of the three immediately preceding years exceeded Rs. 25,000 or not simply because there was no mention of such facts in the penalty orders when the records undisputedly indicated the fact of assessee having disclosed income much in excess of Rs. 25,000 and also that assessee never disputed these facts ?
(2.) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law to hold that failure on the part of Assessing Officer to verify the income/gross receipts of any of the three immediately preceding years did not justify the levy of penalty when facts on record fulfilled the condition for levy of penalty in this regard ? Whether the Tribunal was justified in law to hold that provisions of s. 271A as they stood prior to 1st April, 1989, were applicable to the facts of the case for assessment year under consideration in view of facts and circumstances of the case?" The questions of law proposed in RA Nos. 3 and 4/Jab/1992 for the asst. yrs. 1988-89 and 1989-90 are as under : "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. The Tribunal was justified in law to admit additional argument of the assessee to the effect that calculation of interest chargeable under s. 201(1A) was incorrect ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law to direct the Assessing Officer to calculate the interest under s. 201(1A) from the date when the tax was deductible at source (by assessee from receipts of sub-contractor) to the date on which the assessee paid self-assessment tax or advance tax or TDS against his (assessees) receipts were made by assessees contract awarding authority ?" 2. We have considered the submissions of the parties and have gone through the entire material placed before us. At the very outset, it was found that the tax effect for both the assessment years in all the four reference applications is below Rs. 30,000. As such, relying upon the Boards Instructions No. 1573 issued by the CBDT vide Circular F. No. 279/26/83-ITJ, dt. 12th July, 1984, and Instruction No. 1764 issued by the CBDT vide Circular F. No. 319/11/87-WT, dt. 14th July, 1987, where the tax effect is less than Rs. 30,000, the Board has taken a policy decision not to raise questions of law with a view to reduce litigations before the High Courts and Supreme Court. We find that the Honble Bombay High Court by their decision in the case of CWT vs. Executors of Late DT Udeshi (1991) 189 ITR 319 (Bom) have noted these circulars and have held that no reference application can be filed under such circumstances. In view of the above, the reference applications filed by the Department are dismissed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.