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

2004 (11) TMI 92

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... paid by way of advance tax on September 17, 1973 by the respondent has rightly been treated as advance tax and taken into consideration for the purposes of granting interest u/s 214(1) – Held that Tribunal was justified in directing the payment of interest u/s 214(2) up to the date of refund from the date of the regular assessment - - - - - Dated:- 22-11-2004 - Judge(s) : R. K. AGRAWAL., PRAKASH KRISHNA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by R.K. Agrawal J.- The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", for opinion to this court: "1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ncluded share income from six firms at Rs. 46,882. In the return a note was made to the effect that the share of profit or loss in the firms, M/s. Beni Prasad Sidh Gopal Co. and M/s. Sidh Company, have not been determined and as such has not been included. These two firms also paid interest to the respondent who was a partner apart from the share of profit/loss. The respondent accordingly had showed only interest income from the aforesaid firms, but did not show the share of profit or loss, if any, from these two firms. The Income-tax Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act on September 30, 1975 on an income of Rs. 76,670. He took share income from the six firms at Rs. 56,400 subject to rectification under section .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aid provisions are applicable only when the refund is made prior to the regular assessment. He, therefore, disallowed the claim of interest under section 214(2) of the Act. In appeal, however, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner directed the Income-tax Officer to allow the interest both under sections 214(1) and 214(2) of the Act. The Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal has failed. We have heard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel appearing for the Revenue and Sri Vikram Gulati, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Learned counsel for the Revenue submitted that as the respondent had paid advance tax of Rs. 3,100 on September 17, 1973, i.e., after the due date on which the first instalment of advance tax became payable, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e year immediately following the said financial year. It does not talk about the tax being paid after the due date. The interest is payable on the aggregate of all the instalments of advance tax paid during any financial year. We find that the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the cases of J. J. Dechane v. CIT [1990] 182 ITR 345 and Bakelite Hylam Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 145 (FB); the Bombay High Court in the case of Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. v. First ITO [1991] 188 ITR 135; the Calcutta High Court in the cases of CIT v. Ajoy Paper Mills Ltd. [1990] 181 ITR 454 and CIT v. Graphite India Ltd. [1994] 209 ITR 88, 96; the Gujarat High Court in the cases of Chimanlal S. Patel v. CIT [1994] 210 ITR 419, 421; Chandrakant Damodardas v. ITO [1980] .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... interest in respect of excess payment of advance tax paid during any financial year even if the date is subsequent to the dates stipulated under section 211 for payment of such instalments. The Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Kohinoor Flour Mills [1975] 99 ITR 54 has held that in computing the penalty under section 273(b) of the Act the amount of tax paid by the assessee subsequent to the prescribed date for payment of advance tax should be treated as valid advance tax and should be deducted from 75 per cent, of the tax determined. The aforesaid decision has been affirmed by the apex court reported in CIT v. Kohinoor Flour Mills (P.) Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 585. Thus, the amount of advance tax which is paid after the prescribed date .....

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