Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- 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.
Issues: Whether an appeal lay against the levy of interest under section 18A(6)/18A(8) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and whether dismissal of the assessee's appeal as incompetent was correct.
Analysis: Section 30 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 confers a right of appeal only against the orders specifically enumerated therein. An order imposing interest under section 18A(6) or section 18A(8) does not find place in that . The Court held that penal interest is distinct from tax determined under section 23, and the statutory distinction between tax, penalty and interest, as recognised in section 29, shows that the Act separately treats these liabilities. The expression "denying his liability to be assessed under the Act" was construed to mean a total denial of liability, not a challenge confined only to a component of the assessment such as interest. The amendments introducing a power to waive or reduce interest under rule 48 of the Indian Income-tax Rules, 1922 did not create any corresponding appellate remedy.
Conclusion: No appeal lay against the levy of penal interest, and the appeal was rightly dismissed as incompetent.
Ratio Decidendi: A right of appeal under a taxing statute must arise from an express provision, and a challenge confined to penal interest under section 18A(6)/18A(8) does not amount to a denial of liability to be assessed under section 30 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922.