9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (4) TMI 712 - HC - Income TaxCharge of interest under Section 158 BFA (1) - Tribunal held that charge of interest under Section 158 BFA (1) were automatic and the same were leviable from the date of service of the first notice without an effective and proper communication of the order under Section 127 of the Act transferring jurisdiction from one Officer to the another - Held that - The facts which are not in dispute are that notice under section 158BC of the Income Tax Act was issued on 24.12.2002 which was received by assessees on 04.01.2003. However, the assessees filed their return on 16.07.2004. The assessing officer calculated interest for the period starting from December, 2002 till the date of filing of the return. It is not disputed that the notice dated 23/ 24.12.2002 was issued by the transferee officer. It is only the order under Section 127 of the Act which was served on the appellants in September, 2003. The appellants were bound to comply with the notice and file their return and failure to file the return would attract interest under Section 158 BFA. - Decided in favour of the revenue.
Issues Involved:
Interpretation of Section 158 BFA of the Income Tax Act regarding the charge of interest and the effective communication of jurisdiction transfer under Section 127 of the Act. Analysis: 1. Interpretation of Section 158 BFA: The appeals under section 260A of the Income Tax Act were filed by the assessees challenging the orders passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The main issue revolved around the charge of interest under Section 158 BFA (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The court examined whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the charge of interest was automatic from the date of service of the first notice without proper communication of the order under Section 127 transferring jurisdiction from one officer to another. 2. Factual Background: The notice under section 158BC of the Income Tax Act was issued on 24.12.2002 and received by the assessees on 04.01.2003. However, the assessees filed their return on 16.07.2004. The assessing officer calculated interest from December 2002 till the date of filing the return. The appellants argued that the charge of interest should commence from the date of service of the order under Section 127, which was served in September 2003. 3. Communication of Jurisdiction Transfer: The court noted that the notice issued in December 2002 was by the transferee officer, and it was the order under Section 127 of the Act that was served on the appellants in September 2003. The appellants were required to comply with the notice and file their return, failure of which would attract interest under Section 158 BFA. The court emphasized the importance of effective communication of jurisdiction transfer under Section 127 for determining the commencement of interest charge. 4. Decision: Ultimately, the court answered the substantial question of law in affirmative in favor of the revenue and against the assessees. The court dismissed both appeals based on the interpretation of the provisions of the Income Tax Act and the facts presented before it. This judgment highlights the significance of timely compliance with notices and the implications of jurisdiction transfer on the calculation of interest under the Income Tax Act. In conclusion, the judgment by the High Court of Patna addressed the issues related to the charge of interest under Section 158 BFA of the Income Tax Act and the effective communication of jurisdiction transfer under Section 127. The decision provides clarity on the timeline for the commencement of interest charge and emphasizes the importance of complying with legal requirements to avoid financial implications.
|
