JUDGMENT V.P. Gopalan Nambiyar, C. J. 1. The following question of law has been referred for our determination by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, namely: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that there was a mistake apparent from records in levying interest under S.139(8) and under S.217(1A) and cancelling those levies". The assessee is a private limited company. i he assessment year with which we are concerned in 1972-73. The assessee filed an estimate for the purpose of payment of advance tax under S.212(3A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 showing that, the estimated income will be Rs. 2,88,000 and enclosing a cheque for Rs. 1,10,000 on 10th March 1972, as advance tax on the estimated income. The cheque was not cashed by the Income Tax Officer within time. The Officer demanded a fresh cheque from the assessee, which was sent up on 27th June 1972 and duly encashed. The assessment was completed on 30th November 1972 fixing the income at Rs. 3,36,515. Penal interest was levied on the assessee under S. 217(1A) for Rs. 6,544 and interest was also levied under S.139(8) to the tune of Rs. 3,069 for not submitting the return in time. On appeal by the assessee the interest on both the counts was reduced. 2. The assessee wrote to the Income Tax Officer stating that it had made an estimate and had enclosed a cheque for Rs. 1,10,000 and pointed out that, there could be no question of levying penal interest under S.215 or under S.217(1A). Objection was also raised to the levy of interest under S.139. On the basis of this letter the Income Tax Officer passed an order of rectification under S.154 of the Act accepting the assessee's plea and deleting the amounts charged by way of interest under S.215, but, holding that, as the tax, as per the estimate, was not paid in time, the levy of interest under S.217(1A) and 139(8) was justified and proper. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but, the appeal proved unsuccessful. On further appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal took the view that, the assessee had filed an estimate, which was received by the Income Tax Officer on 10th March 1972 and, therefore, there cannot be a levy of interest under S.217(1A) of the Act. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but, the appeal proved unsuccessful. On further appeal to the Appellate Tribunal, the Tribunal took the view that, the assessee had filed an estimate, which was received by the Income Tax Officer on 10th March 1972 and, therefore, there cannot be a levy of interest under S.217(1A) of the Act. Regarding the levy of interest under S.139, the Tribunal was of the view that, by a circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes, the assessee had been given an option of paying the advance tax either by cash or by cheque, and that, he had opted for the latter. The Tribunal, therefore, held that the assessee had discharged his burden of proving the payment of tax; that it was for the Income Tax Officer to get the cheque encashed; and having failed to do so, the assessee cannot be penalised by levying interest. In this view, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. It referred the question of law under S.256(1)of the Act. 3. S.139(8) of the Act reads: "139(8).-- (a) Where the return under sub-s.(1) or sub-s.(2) or sub-s.(4) for an assessment year is furnished after the specified date, or is not furnished, then whether or not the Income Tax Officer has extended the date for furnishing the return under sub-s.(1) or sub-s.(2), the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at twelve per cent per annum, reckoned from the day immediately following the specified date to the date of the furnishing of the return or, where no return has been furnished, the date of completion of the assessment under S.144, on the amount of the tax payable on the total income as determined on regular assessment, as reduced by the advance tax, if any, paid, and any tax deducted at source: Provided that the Income Tax Officer may, in such cases and under such circumstances as may be prescribed, reduce or waive the interest payable by any assessee under this sub-section. Explanation 1.-- For the purposes of this sub-section, "specified date", in relation to a return for an assessment year means,- (a) in the case of every assessee whose total income, or the total income of any person in respect of which he it assessable under this Act, includes any income from business or profession, the date of the expiry of four months from the end of the previous year or where there is more than one previous year, from the end of the previous year which expired last before the commencement of the assessment year, or the 30th day of June of the assessment year, whichever is later; (b) in the case of every other assesses, the 30th day of June of the assessment year. Explanation 2.-- For the purpose of this sub-section, where the assessee is a registered firm or an unregistered firm which has been assessed under clause (b) of S.183, the tax payable on the total income shall be the amount of tax which would have been payable if the firm had been assessed as an unregistered firm. (b) Where as a result of an order urder S.154 or S.155 or S.250 or S.254 or S.260 or S.262 or S.264, the amount of tax on which interest was payable under this sub-section has been reduced, the interest shall be reduced accordingly, and the excess interest paid, if any, shall be refunded". (b) Where as a result of an order urder S.154 or S.155 or S.250 or S.254 or S.260 or S.262 or S.264, the amount of tax on which interest was payable under this sub-section has been reduced, the interest shall be reduced accordingly, and the excess interest paid, if any, shall be refunded". S.212(3A) of the Act reads:- " 212 (3A).-- In the case of any assessee who is required to pay advance tax by an order under S.210, if, by reason of the current income being likely to be greater than the income on which the advance tax payable by him under S.210 has been computed or for any other reason, the amount of advance tax computed in the manner laid down in S.209 on the current income (which shall be estimated by the assessee) exceeds the amount of advance tax demanded from him under S.210 by more than 33-1/3 per cent of the latter amount, he shall, at any time before the date on which the last instalment of advance tax is due from him, send to the Income Tax Officer an estimate of -- (i) the current income, and (ii) the advance tax payable by him on the current income calculated in the manner laid down in S.209, and shall pay such amount of advance tax as accords with his estimate on such of the dates applicable in his case under S.211 as have not expired, by instalments which may be revised according to sub-s.(2): Provided that in a case where the Commissioner is satisfied that, having regard to the nature of the business carried on by the assessee and the date of expiry of the previous year in respect of such business, it will be difficult for the assessee to furnish the estimate required to be furnished by him in accordance with the provisions of this sub-section before the date on which the last instalment of advance tax is due in his case, he may, if the assessee pays the advance tax demanded from him under S.20 before such date, extend the date for furnishing such estimate upto a period of thirty days immediately following the last date of the previous year in respect of that business, and where the date if so extended, the assessee shall pay, on or before the date as so extended, the amount by which the amount of advance tax already paid by him falls short of the advance tax payable in accordance with his estimate". S.217(1A) of the Act reads:- " 217(1A). Where, on making the regular assessment, the Income Tax Officer finds that any such person as is referred to in sub-s.(3A) of S.212 has not sent the estimate referred to therein, simple interest at the rate of twelve per cent per annum from the 1st day of April next following the financial year in which the advance tax was payable in accordance with the said sub-section upto the date of the regular assessment shall be payable by the assessee upon the amount by which the advance tax paid by him falls short of the assessed tax as defined in sub-s.(5) of S.215". Confining attention to S.217(1A) it will be noticed that the penal interest provided for by the said section will be attracted only if the assessee concerned has not sent the estimate referred to in sub-s.(3A) of S.212. The Tribunal's view that, to the extent proved, the "estimate" had actually been sent, whatever may be the position in regard to the payment of advance tax, is plausible. But, taking a closer view of sub-clause (1A) of S.217, we should give enough weight and significance to the expression" estimate referred to therein" which would take us back to sub S.(3A) of S.212. Under that sub-section it is clear that the estimate consists of; (1) an estimate of the current income; and (2) an estimate of the advance tax, coupled with (3) a payment of the advance tax. Therefore, counsel for the revenue contends -- we think with at least equal, if not greater, plausibility -- that the reasonable view to take as to the scope and amplitude of sub-clause (1A) of S.217 would be to read all the three requirements into that sub-clause, viz., the requirement of an estimate of income, of an estimate of advance tax, and of a payment of the advance tax; with the result that if any one of these three is shown to be in default, the levy of penal interest would be attracted. The view is attractive, and we are inclined to think that, in order to secure the object and the purpose of the enactment, and to harmonise the different provisions, the view is worthy of acceptance. The view is attractive, and we are inclined to think that, in order to secure the object and the purpose of the enactment, and to harmonise the different provisions, the view is worthy of acceptance. We do not, however, think it necessary to express our final and concluded view, as, in any event, we are of the opinion that the question of law referred for our opinion can be answered on the other proved facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Even assuming that, for failure to comply with any one of the three requirements stated to be involved in sub-clause (3A) of S.212, the levy of interest under S.217(1A) would be attracted, in the instant case, the only default that has been alleged against the assessee is that he did not pay the advance tax. This is on the ground that the payment was made not in cash but only by cheque. But, as we pointed out, there is the Circular No. 3, dated 11th February 1969 of the Board of Direct Taxes which forms Annexure F to the statement of the case which recalls the decision of the Board that payment tendered by crossed cheque will be accepted in the Income Tax Office. Clause (6) of the Circular stated: " For removal of alt doubts it is clarified that the date of tax payment will be the date on which the proceeds of the cheque are realised and credited to the Government account". Relying upon the above clause, counsel for the revenue stated that, it is only on realisation of the proceeds that payment could be said to have been made. While it will ordinarily be so, where the non realisation is on account of the neglect or default of the Income Tax Officer as in this case, we do not think, the assessee can be visited with the levy of penal interest or other burdens under the provision of the Taxing Statute. We are therefore of the view that, in this case, the assessee had discharged the burden of proving that there was payment of advance tax by cheque duly forwarded by them, and the non realisation of the cheque was only owing to. default and neglect of Income Tax Officer, for which, the assessee is not to blame. We answer the question in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. default and neglect of Income Tax Officer, for which, the assessee is not to blame. We answer the question in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the department. No costs.