9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Assessment of estate duty - Extension of time for filing return - Provisional assessment and payment in instalments - Demand of interest on belated payments - Appeal against interest payment - Validity of interest on provisional assessment - Interpretation of section 70 of the Estate Duty Act - Application of previous legal rulings Analysis: The judgment pertains to the assessment of estate duty following the death of Smt. H. H. Rajkuverba Maharani of Gondal. The accountable person requested an extension for filing the return, which was granted, and the return was eventually filed on January 5, 1968. A provisional assessment of estate duty was made on January 6, 1968, and the accountable person requested to pay in instalments. The final assessment was completed on November 30, 1972, amounting to Rs. 63,15,970. Subsequently, interest on belated payments was calculated, leading to a balance payable of Rs. 3,22,881. The Appellate Controller and the Appellate Tribunal upheld the interest payment decision, which was challenged in a writ petition. The main contention raised was regarding the levy of interest on the provisional assessment. The petitioner argued that interest should not be demanded after the duty payment on August 7, 1978, and that the interest on regular duty should be quashed. The single judge partially agreed, quashing part of the interest demand. The dispute then focused on a specific amount of interest, Rs. 57,208, related to the provisional assessment. The petitioner relied on the Bettiah Estate case, arguing that interest on provisional assessment is not permissible until the assessment is complete. In response, the Revenue contended that section 57 of the Act addresses provisional assessments and empowers the assessing authority to demand interest under section 70(1) if payment is postponed. The court agreed with the Revenue's argument, emphasizing that section 70(1) applies to cases where duty payment is postponed, not limited to final assessments. The court distinguished the Bettiah Estate case, highlighting the different scenarios governed by section 70(1) and section 70(2) of the Act. The judgment concluded by dismissing the writ appeal, upholding the validity of interest on the provisional assessment. In summary, the judgment clarifies the application of section 70 of the Estate Duty Act concerning interest on provisional assessments and emphasizes the distinction between sub-sections (1) and (2) of the Act. It underscores that interest can be demanded on belated payments even after the duty payment, as long as the duty payment is postponed. The court's decision aligns with the Revenue's interpretation, rejecting the petitioner's argument based on previous legal rulings.
|
