RAJESH BINDAL, J. - (1.) THE following question of law, arising out of the order passed by the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, been referred for the opinion of this Court : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of the provisions of s. 216 (a), the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was not liable to pay interest under s. 216 in respect of the deficient payment of advance tax in the first two instalments for the asst. yr. 1982 -83 -
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts, as noticed by the Tribunal in the statement of case, are that during the previous year relevant to the assessment year in question, the assessee filed an estimate of advance tax payable, determining its liability at Rs. Rs. 68,88,000. The balance amount of advance tax was paid by the assessee with the final instalment. This resulted in short payment of the first two instalments of advance tax which would have been of Rs. 22,96,000 each as against Rs. 15,37,500 paid by the assessee. As the assessee deferred payment of the first two instalments, the AO charged interest under s. 216 of the IT Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"). The levy of interest was upheld by the Commissioner of Income - tax (Appeals) [for short, "the CIT(A)"]. In appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal held that the interest under s. 216 is to be calculated having regard to the aggregate advance tax actually paid during the year and not instalment wise. Since the assessee had paid the entire advance tax upto the last date, the interest was not held to be chargeable.
(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance have gone through the paper book. The AO charged interest under s. 216 of the Act by making the following observations in the order of assessment : details of sales with preceding year show that there was no decline in business activities. The assessee by filing estimate comes to Rs. 60,680." (emphasis, italicised in print, supplied) ;