9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of section 16(3) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957 regarding the calculation of interest on delayed tax payments. Analysis: The judgment of the court dealt with the interpretation of section 16(3) of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957, specifically focusing on whether the assessee is liable to pay interest at the rate of 2 per cent. for every completed month or for the whole month even for part of the month's delay in paying tax. The petitioner argued that the rate of interest mentioned in the section denotes the rate at which interest is payable for each month or part thereof, including any delay in payment. However, the Government Pleader contended that even part of a month should be considered as a full month for the purpose of calculating interest. The court examined the language of the law and disagreed with the Government Pleader's interpretation. It held that the words "for each month or part thereof" in section 16(3) clarify that interest must be calculated for both completed months and any part of a month at the specified rate. The court cited a similar case from the Allahabad High Court and a judgment from the Madras High Court to support its interpretation. Both cases concluded that interest should be charged for the actual period of delay and not for the full month, in line with the wording of the law. Based on the analysis, the court ruled that the assessee is only liable to pay interest for the actual period of delay in tax payment, not for the entire month as demanded by the tax notices. Therefore, the impugned notices were quashed to the extent that they demanded interest for the entire month. In specific cases mentioned in the judgment, the court determined the number of days for which interest was payable for each delay in tax payment. As a result, the writ petitions were partly allowed, and the court ordered that the assessee should pay interest only for the actual period of delay as per the interpretation of section 16(3). No costs were awarded, but an advocate's fee was specified for each case.
|
