Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1973 (2) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cultural Income-tax Act, 1948 (III of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as " the Act "). The appellant was assessed to agricultural income-tax for the year 1359 Fasli in a sum of Rs. 53,097.25 and was directed to pay. the same in four instalments of Rs. 13,274.31 each payable on December 9, 1952, February 9, 1953, April 9. 1953, and June 9, 1953, and, accordingly, the first instalment was recovered from him with penalty. Notice to pay the second and third instalments by April 21, 1953, was served on him but this amount was not paid. Instead, the appellant filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court and obtained a stay order which was subsequently vacated. Thereafter, the State sought to recover the amount but the appellant filed a revisi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... or, where an assessee is in default, the amount assessed as agricultural income-tax, as if it were an arrear of land revenue. (2) No proceedings for the recovery of any sum payable under this Act shall be commenced after the expiration of one year from the date on which the last instalment fixed under section 30 falls due or after the expiration of one year from the date on which any appeal relating to such sum has been disposed of. " Before we deal with the main contention, it may be stated that once a notice of demand is served on the assessee for payment of tax due under the Act, and the assessee makes a default after the date for payment specified therein has expired, a debt is created in favour of the State. This debt the State .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... (Amendment) Act, 1953, by which the following explanation was added : " Explanation.-- A proceeding for the recovery of any sum shall be deemed to have commenced within the meaning of this section, if some action is taken to recover the whole or any part of the sum within the period hereinbefore referred to, and for the removal of doubts it is hereby declared that the several modes of recovery specified in this section are neither mutually exclusive, nor affect in any way any other law for the time being in force relating to the recovery of debts due to Government, and it shall be lawful for the Income-tax Officer, if for any special reasons to be recorded he so thinks fit, to have recourse to any such mode of recovery notwithstanding .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt is made upon the assessee quantifying the tax due from him and a demand for the payment thereof is issued within the period specified therein, it creates a debt payable by the assessee in favour of the State. It is well-established that once a debt is created, the State has the right to recover it by any of the modes open to it under the general law, unless as a matter of policy only a specific mode to the exclusion of any other is prescribed by the law. No such prohibition is enacted in section 32 of the Act. Even prior to the amendment of sub-section (7) of section 46 of the 1922 Act, several High Courts in this country had taken this view. In Manickam Chettiar v. Income-tax Officer, Madura, a Full Bench of the Madras High Court was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... State. In this case the Patna High Court was considering whether the Crown as a creditor has the ordinary right of suit against the assessee. Following the Full Bench judgment of the Madras High Court, it was held that a suit was maintainable. The contention of Mr. P. R. Das, learned counsel for the appellant, that the only method by which income-tax may be recovered is that laid down in section 46, was repelled by Chatterjee J. In Chaganti Raghava Reddy v. Income-tax Officer, Bapatla, the Andhra Pradesh High Court also took a similar view. On principle as well as on the consistent view of the High Courts, it is beyond doubt that where a taxing statute provides for a summary mode of recovery and is not exhaustive, it will be open to the Sta .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates