9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (1) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed CIT (Appeals) erred materially in law and in fact in not allowing deduction of liability to pay interest charged and penalty levied by the tax authorities in the appellant's case under various statutes for different years, in the computation of new wealth, as claimed by the appellant, i.e., from the (first) relevant valuation date of the respective assessment year till the (last) valuation date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t March of each of these years. 3. The Short point for consideration in all these appeals in whether the penalties imposed on the assessee under sections 18(1) (a), (b) (c), 271(1) (c) and 273 and interest thereon are allowable as "dates. In other words, what the assessee seeks to canvass before us is that although the penalties and interest for the various years were levied well after the rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his order (Wealth-tax liability). In other words, a modification was sought for in the directions of the CWT (Appeals) contained in para 4(b). 6. The learned D. R. on the other hand, strongly supported the action of the CWT (Appeals). According to him, the claim of the assessee was not tenable since he had challenged the levy of penalties and was squarely hit by section 2(m)(iii)(a). In this co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be allowed as a deduction. This is what the Supreme Court has decided in the case of K. S. N. Bhatt. This decision however cannot be stretched to rope in penalty as well as interest since their levy is uncertain and indeterminate on the relevant valuation date. It is an admitted fact that the penalties and interest in question saw the light of day only in the year 1981 and after. The assessee c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (iii) of the Act. 9. We accordingly uphold the action of the CWT (Appeals) in respect of the assessee's claim pertaining to penalties and interest thereon. In the light of this decision we do not find it necessary to deal with the arguments of the D. R. pertaining to section 2(m) (iii) (a) and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kantilal Manilal. 10. As a result the appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
