9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 711X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Income Tax Department on 07-02-1989 from the sale of the property of the late husband of the petitioner. Since there were amounts in excess of the demands under the 1961 Act at that point of time, the Income Tax Department remitted a sum of Rs.3,03,288/-in court in proceedings initiated by the aforesaid Mrs. Jolly Thomas. It does not appear from the statement that there was any interdicting order preventing the Income Tax Department from adjusting the balance of the amount against the demand outstanding at the relevant time. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be mulcted with any liability for interest u/s 220 (2) for the period from 07-02-1989 to 07-06-1991. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed by directing that the amount of Rs.1,00,0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... illegal. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner who is the wife of late K.T. Thomas from whom certain amount were due towards arrears of Income tax under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1961 Act'). A property belonging to late K.T. Thomas was sold in auction on 07-02-1989 for an amount of Rs.12,01,000/- under the provisions of the II-Schedule to the 1961 Act on 01-08-1994 a further notice was issued by the Tax Recovery Officer demanding payment of a further sum of Rs.1,89,611/- towards interest chargeable in terms of the provisions contained in Section 220 (2) of the 1961 Act. Late K.T. Thomas filed a reply to the demand notice stating that since the entire tax amount (Rs.8,9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... virtue of Ext.P10 order giving effect the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Calicut referred to above has not been refunded to the petitioner and seeking the credit / refund of a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- remitted towards the demand for the year 1987-1988 and further being aggrieved by the demand for interest under Section 220 (2) of the 1961 Act as detailed above. 2. The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Income Tax Department referred to the statement filed in this case and submits that the amount of refund due to the petitioner on account of Ext.P10 order has already been granted. It is submitted very fairly that the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- paid by the petitioner to the Tax Recovery Officer against the demand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt shows that an amount of Rs.12,01,000/- was received by the Income Tax Department on 07-02-1989 from the sale of the property of the late husband of the petitioner. Since there were amounts in excess of the demands under the 1961 Act at that point of time, the Income Tax Department remitted a sum of Rs.3,03,288/-in court in proceedings initiated by the aforesaid Mrs. Jolly Thomas. It does not appear from the statement that there was any interdicting order preventing the Income Tax Department from adjusting the balance of the amount against the demand outstanding at the relevant time. Therefore, I am of the view that the petitioner cannot be mulcted with any liability for interest under Section 220 (2) of the 1961 Act for the period from 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
