9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of the certificate issued by the Excess Profits Tax Officer for recovery of taxes. 2. Interpretation of section 46(7) of the Act regarding the limitation period for recovery proceedings. 3. Effect of revision of tax liability by the Commissioner on the validity of the recovery certificate. 4. Authority of the Collector to recover the revised amount of tax based on the original certificate. Analysis: 1. The petitioner was initially assessed for excess profits tax for specific accounting periods, and the Excess Profits Tax Officer issued demand notices for the determined amounts. Subsequently, the Commissioner revised the tax liability, reducing the total amount due. The petitioner challenged the recovery of the original tax amount through a writ petition, primarily arguing that the recovery certificate was invalid as it did not accurately reflect the revised tax liability. 2. The Excess Profits Tax Officer issued a recovery certificate to the Collector within the permissible time frame under section 46(7) of the Act. The petitioner contended that the certificate was not valid as it did not reflect the correct tax amount after the revision by the Commissioner. However, the court held that the certificate was a valid proceeding for tax recovery, and the Collector had the authority to initiate recovery proceedings based on the original certificate. 3. The court emphasized that the revision of tax liability by the Commissioner did not render the original recovery certificate invalid. The certificate issued by the Excess Profits Tax Officer was deemed lawful at the time of issuance, and the subsequent reduction in tax liability did not impact the validity of the recovery proceedings initiated based on the original certificate. 4. The petitioner also argued that the recovery proceedings were time-barred under section 46(7) of the Act. However, the court rejected this contention, stating that the certificate issued within the prescribed period was valid for recovery, irrespective of the subsequent revision in tax liability. The court upheld the Collector's authority to recover the revised tax amount based on the original certificate, dismissing the petitioner's claim for immunity from payment. In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the Collector, affirming the validity of the recovery certificate issued by the Excess Profits Tax Officer and rejecting the petitioner's objections regarding the limitation period and the revised tax liability. The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was ordered to pay costs.
|
