1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>High Court rules no interest on additional tax demand under Haryana Sales Tax Act</h1> The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that no interest was payable on the additional demand created by the Department under section 25(5) ... - Issues:1. Interpretation of interest levied under section 25(5) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973.Analysis:The judgment delivered by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana pertained to the interpretation of interest levied under section 25(5) of the Haryana General Sales Tax Act, 1973. The case involved an assessee who purchased sunbaked bricks from registered dealers, paid sales tax at the first stage of sale, burnt the bricks in a kiln, and sold them without charging sales tax to subsequent purchasers. The Assessing Authority disallowed the claim for deduction under section 18 of the Act, leading to the creation of an additional demand against the assessee, along with the imposition of tax, interest, and penalty under sections 25(5) and 47 of the Act.The assessee contended that no interest was payable on the additional demand created by the Department and sought a reference to the High Court on the legal question. The Tribunal initially rejected the request, but upon challenge in Sales Tax Case No. 21 of 1988, the High Court directed the Tribunal to frame the question of law and refer the matter again. The counsel for the petitioner relied on precedents like J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Commercial Taxes Officer and Frick India Limited v. State of Haryana, where the Supreme Court clarified that interest is due only on the amount of tax payable based on the return filed by the dealer, and there is no obligation for the dealer to predict the final assessment at the time of filing the return.The High Court, in line with the precedents cited, held that the assessee was not liable to pay interest on the additional demand created by the Department. The judgment favored the assessee and ruled against the Revenue. Consequently, the eight references related to the case were disposed of based on this decision.