TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case ofM/S. EVERYDAY BANKING AND RETAIL ASSETS, REP. BY ITS PARTNER MR. A.A. SIVAKUMAR VERSUS OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , CHENNAI [2024 (1) TMI 1043 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]held that the Petitioner asserts that all tax dues were settled and that the Petitioner requires time to pay interest. Thus, the Petitioner was allowed to pay interest in respect of four assessment years vide caution notice because the business of the assessee was to be directed to pay amounts of interest demanded in three equal monthly installments.
Facts:
Everyday Banking and Retail Assets (“the Petitioner”) were issued a caution notice (“the Impugned Notice”) to pay interest in respect of the Assessment Years2017-18 to 2020-21. The Petitioner hadpaid all the tax dues but required time to pay interest since the Petitioner’s business was affected during the COVID-19 pandemic period.
The Assistant Commissioner (“the Respondent”) required interest payments to be made expeditiously.
Hence, aggrieved by the Impugned Notice the present writ was filed by the Petitioner.
Issue:
Whether payment of interest can be made in installments?
Held:
The Madras High Court in M/S. EVERYDAY BANKING AND RETAIL ASSETS, REP. BY ITS PARTNER MR. A.A. SIVAKUMAR VERSUS OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , CHENNAI [2024 (1) TMI 1043 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]held as under:
- Observed that, the Petitioner asserts that all tax dues were settled and that the Petitioner requires time to pay interest.
- Held that, the Petitioner pay the amounts demanded in the Impugned Notice in three equal monthly installments. Hence, the Petition was closed.
(Author can be reached at [email protected])