Law: Finance Act, 1991

Section: 12(8)

Finance Act (XII of 1991)----S. 12(8)---Corporate Assets Tax---Additional tax/penalty could not be charged in the context of Corporate Assets Tax due to confusion created in the minds of taxpayers as a result of multiple circulars issued by the Central Board of Revenue---Order of First Appellate Authority was legally justified in deleting the additional tax and no exception to the order was taken---Departmental appeal was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal being devoid of merits. 2001 PTD (Trib.) -1790; 2001 PTD (Trib.) 2964; 2002 PTD (Trib.) 1982; 87 Tax 211 (Trib.); W.T.A. No.1872/LB of 1997, dated 26-5-1998 and W.T.A. No.6872/LB of 1996, dated 4-7-2001 rel. JUDGMENT MUKHTAR AHMAD GONDAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER).---The department, through this appeal, has assailed the impugned order on the ground that the learned CIT(A) was not justified to delete the levy of additional tax and penalty as neither the return was filed nor Corporate Assets Tax was paid by the assessee. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent, a limited company deriving income from running a sugar mills, was liable to pay Corporate Assets Tax on its fixed assets of Rs.38,84,08,891 as on 30-9-1991 was liable to pay the CAT but the respondent taxpayer neither filed return nor paid CAT. The respondent was duly confronted through a notice that it was liable to pay CAT amounting to Rs.20,00,000 within six months of the close of accounting period ending on 30-9-1991 i.e. by 31-3-1992. Since failure to pay statedly CAT was established the company was liable to pay additional tax @ 24% of the outstanding demand. The reply tendered by the appellant was found by the Taxation Officer as not plausible, so he created liability of CAT amounting to Rs.20,00,000 and also charged. additional tax @ 24% per annum at Rs.19,20,000 for non-payment of the tax. This treatment was assailed in first appeal before the CIT(A) on the ground that below taxable return was filed under the impression that from value of fixed assets liability pertaining to previous years were to be reduced so as to arrive at net assets on which CAT was to be charged. According to the appellant the principal amount was not properly…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492