Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jaipur Electro P. Ltd. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberD.B. Civil Income-tax Reference Application No. 65 of 1978
Judge
Reported in[1990]183ITR476(Raj)
ActsIncome Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 221
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax
RespondentJaipur Electro P. Ltd.
Appellant Advocate S.M. Mehta, Adv.
Respondent Advocate G.S. Bafna and; J.N. Sharma, Advs.
Excerpt:
- - 2. the facts giving rise to this application are that the assessee is a small scale cottage industry manufacturing indigenous diesel generating sets supplied mainly to the government and defence priority section as well as to public sector undertakings and private industries. , on or before july 27, 1975. the assessee failed to make the payment by the due date, but the entire amount of tax was deposited by the assessee prior to november 7, 1975. 3. the learned income-tax officer after issue of notice, imposed a penalty of rs. we are unable to hold that the tribunal has acted on any irrelevant material or has failed to consider material evidence on record......the penalty was reduced from rs. 22,000 to rs. 13,000.4. the aggrieved assessee went up before the appellate tribunal. the appellate tribunal, after considering all the facts placed before it, came to the conclusion that the assessee has been able to show reasonable grounds for making late payment of the due amount and as such it set aside the penalty imposed by the income-tax officer and reduced by the appellate assistant commissioner.5. being aggrieved with the order of the appellate tribunal, the petitioner submitted an application under section 256(1) of the act. the tribunal again examined the arguments advanced by the parties and came to the following conclusion :'from the aforesaid discussion, it is clear that the finding of the tribunal is essentially a finding of fact. the.....
Judgment:

M.L. Shrimal, J.

1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (to be referred to hereinafter as 'the Act'), filed by the Revenue.

2. The facts giving rise to this application are that the assessee is a small scale cottage industry manufacturing indigenous diesel generating sets supplied mainly to the Government and defence priority section as well as to public sector undertakings and private industries. It filed a return for the year 1975-76 declaring an income of Rs. 3,60,040 on June 28, 1975. It was obligatory on the part of the assessee to pay the self-assessment tax within 30 days of the furnishing of the return, i.e., on or before July 27, 1975. The assessee failed to make the payment by the due date, but the entire amount of tax was deposited by the assessee prior to November 7, 1975.

3. The learned Income-tax Officer after issue of notice, imposed a penalty of Rs. 22,000 under Section 140A(3) of the Act. The appeal filed by the assessee was partly accepted and the penalty was reduced from Rs. 22,000 to Rs. 13,000.

4. The aggrieved assessee went up before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal, after considering all the facts placed before it, came to the conclusion that the assessee has been able to show reasonable grounds for making late payment of the due amount and as such it set aside the penalty imposed by the Income-tax Officer and reduced by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner.

5. Being aggrieved with the order of the Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner submitted an application under Section 256(1) of the Act. The Tribunal again examined the arguments advanced by the parties and came to the following conclusion :

'From the aforesaid discussion, it is clear that the finding of the Tribunal is essentially a finding of fact. The Tribunal, after considering all facts and circumstances of the case, gave a finding that no penalty is leviable. The learned departmental representative was not able to point out any important material which was not considered by the Tribunal. It was also not suggested that the Tribunal considered any irrelevant material or that the finding of the Tribunal is not based on the material on record. Thus, in our opinion, no question of law would arise out of the Tribunal's order.'

6. On the basis of the above findings, the Tribunal refused to refer the case to this court. Hence, this petition.

7. The arguments advanced before the Tribunal have been reiterated. We are unable to hold that the Tribunal has acted on any irrelevant material or has failed to consider material evidence on record. The circumstances considered by the Tribunal regarding the existing loan and the financial stringency of the assessee as detailed in the documents on record cannot be said to be irrelevant material. This court, in exercise of its power under Section 256(2) of the Act, only exercises advisory jurisdiction. It cannot go into the question whether the conclusion of the Tribunal arrived at on facts was based upon insufficient evidence. We are unable to hold that the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal is based on no evidence. No question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal and as such we find no reason to ask the Tribunal to state the case.

8. The application for reference is, therefore, dismissed. The parties will bear their own costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //