https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343434 Under the self-assessment scheme, tax had to be discharged within the rule-prescribed time, and "due date for payment" under Section 32(1) meant the return and payment date fixed by the Rules, not the date of final assessment. Interest therefore accrued from that due date, and the interim writ order only stayed recovery; it did not extinguish the statutory liability or create immunity from interest or penalty under Sections 53 and 60. The decision also noted that the prior constitutional challenge had already failed, and the cited authority on a different provision was inapplicable. The demand for interest and penalty was sustained. en-us Mon, 15 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Mar 2018 15:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343434 Under the self-assessment scheme, tax had to be discharged within the rule-prescribed time, and "due date for payment" under Section 32(1) meant the return and payment date fixed by the Rules, not the date of final assessment. Interest therefore accrued from that due date, and the interim writ order only stayed recovery; it did not extinguish the statutory liability or create immunity from interest or penalty under Sections 53 and 60. The decision also noted that the prior constitutional challenge had already failed, and the cited authority on a different provision was inapplicable. The demand for interest and penalty was sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 15 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343434