9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of section 249(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding payment of tax before filing an appeal.
Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Interpretation of section 249(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 regarding payment of tax before filing an appeal. The judgment delivered by the High Court of Delhi involved a question referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the interpretation of section 249(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The controversy arose when an assessee filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner for the assessment year 1973-74 without having paid the tax due on the returned income. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner rejected the appeal on this ground, citing the stipulations of section 249(4) of the Act. The assessee later paid a sum of Rs. 5,000 in March 1977, and the Tribunal held that this payment should be considered, allowing the appeal to be heard on its merits. The Revenue contended that the payment made in March 1977 was inconsequential as the balance amount of tax was due by April 2, 1976, the date of filing the appeal. The High Court examined the provisions of section 249(4) which required the tax due on the income returned to be paid at the time of filing the appeal. The Court noted that the appeal was heard on multiple dates by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and the deficiency in the appeal was not pointed out until after the deposit was made by the assessee. The proviso to sub-section (4) of section 249 empowered the Commissioner to allow the deposit of deficit tax even after the appeal had been filed. Consequently, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, affirming that the Tribunal's decision was justified, and answered the question in the affirmative, against the Revenue. This judgment provides a detailed analysis of the interpretation of section 249(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, emphasizing the requirement for the tax due on the returned income to be paid at the time of filing an appeal. The Court considered the timeline of events, the provisions of the Act, and the powers of the Commissioner in permitting the deposit of deficit tax. The ruling highlights the importance of adherence to statutory provisions and the authority granted to the Commissioner in exceptional circumstances.
|
