On appeal filed before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that the provisions of section 201(1) and 201(1A) were not attracted because the non deduction of tax at source by KPTCL was under the bona fide belief that it was not obliged to deduct tax at source on payments in excess of Rs.3 lakhs towards unutilized leave period as it believed that its employees were employees of State Government. The Tribunal held that the obligation of the assessee was only to make a bona fide estimate of the salary. In the facts and circumstance of the instant case, the assessee had made such an estimate. The assessee’s obligation under section 192 was, therefore, properly discharged and hence proceedings under section 201(1) and 201(1A) were quashed. Revenue filed miscellaneous petition against the impugned order of the Tribunal quashing the orders under sections 201(1) and 201(1A). The Tribunal in its order referred to several decisions wherein it has been held that estimate of income under the salary, if it is bona fide, then the payer cannot be treated as an ‘assessee-in-default’. Therefore, there is no merit in allegations in the miscellaneous petition. Besides the above, there is also an allegation that the revenue was prevented from assisting the Bench by differentiating the cases relied by the assessee on the contention of the assessee that it was a state. As already said, the Tribunal has already accepted the contention of the revenue that the assessee is not a State. The allegations that the revenue was prevented from arguing is, therefore, not correct for the reason the argument was accepted by the Tribunal.  (AY. 2013 -14)