TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1984 (9) TMI 129
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ad paid an advance tax of Rs. 4,415. The assessment was made on 27th Jan., 1981 and the tax was assessed at Rs. 2,230. On 25th May, 1982, the ITO issued a refund order for Rs. 2,575. The assessee's contention was that the total refund due to it was in a sum of Rs. 3,288 Calculated as below: (1) Excess of advance tax over tax assessed Rs. 2,188.00 (2) Interest under s. 214(1) from 1st April, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar exceeds the amount with the which he is properly chargeable under the Act for that year, he shall be entitled to a refund of the excess. In this case, the advance tax paid was more than the tax assessed and, therefore the refund the excess tax patently came within the purview of s. 237 and an appeal against the order made under s. 237 lay under s. 246(1)(n). The ld. Departmental Representative....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r an independent suit. But that an appeal will not lie under s. 246(1)(n) because s. 237 does not apply to payments of interest. This arguments may look only specifically correct but, on a proper appreciation of the various provisions of the Act, it would be clear that s. 237 would govern no only the principal amount of excess tax but also the interest thereon. It was conceded that while the Act p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....intended to specify the obligation of the ITO to refund the amount to the assessee. Such an obligation was there even in the absence of s. 237. The only difference was that for want to s. 237 an assessee might have to adopt proceedings for recovery by wary of a suit or writ petition if the ITO did not grant the necessary refund. The ld. counsel for the assessee brought to out a contention a judgm....