High Court Of Rajasthan
CIT vs. Dhanraj Mundra
Asst. Year 1988-89
Rajesh Balia & Mohd. Yamin, JJ.
D.B. IT Ref. No. 63 of 1999
23rd February, 2000
Sundeep Bhandawat, for the Applicant : None, for the Respondent
BY THE COURT :
This is an application under s. 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961, (for short “the Act”) whereby the CIT, Udaipur, has sought for a direction to the Tribunal to refer the following question of law to this Court for determination : “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no interest can be charged under s. 217(1) or s. 217(1A) as the assessee has filed the estimates and has paid tax accordingly, by ignoring the fact that the assessee had filed the estimate under s. 209A(1) whereas the AO charged interest under s. 217(1A) for non-filing of estimates under s. 209A(4) of the IT Act ?”
The CIT moved an application under s. 256(1) before the Tribunal for referring the above question of law to this Court. The Tribunal rejected the above application vide its order dt. 4th May, 1998, holding that answer to the question is self-evident and, therefore, it need not be referred.
Having heard the learned counsel for the Revenue, we are of the opinion that the question raised is a question of law and as it involves interpretation of statutory provision and effect of omission of s. 209A w.e.f. 1st April, 1988, on the obligation of the assessee to furnish estimate of his income under s. 209A during the financial year relevant to the asst. yr.1988-89, which requires consideration.
The Tribunal has erred in rejecting the application under s. 256(1) on the ground that answer is self-evident. In this view of the matter, we allow this reference application and direct the Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur, to refer the following question for determination to this Court : “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that no interest can be charged under s. 217(1) or s. 217(1A) when the assessee has filed the estimate of his income under s. 209A(1) and paid tax accordingly, and that he was not required to file estimate of his income under s. 209A(4) of the IT Act, thereafter ?”
[Citation : 257 ITR 785]