1968 (2) TMI 16

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... petition under article 226 of the Constitution is to quash an order of the first respondent, the Central Board of Revenue, dated April 26, 1962. The petitioner is a private limited company and for the assessment year 1959-60, it was charged to a penal interest of Rs. 9,176.09, under section 18A(6) and (7) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. That order was dated September 1, 1960. On August 30, 1961, an ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... held that an order of assessment could not be revised by the Commissioner on an application by the assessee under section 33A(2) of the Act. But that does not decide the point in the present case. Boddu Seetharamaswamy v. Commissioner of Income-tax is directly in point. There Subba Rao C.J. as he then was, and Bhimasankaram J. held that section 30 of the Indian Income-tax Act which regulated the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... fact that the penal interest is added to the tax, since it finds a place in the order of assessment, can make no difference to the true character of penal interest. As the expression itself indicates, it is a penalty levied on account of under-assessment of the estimated income for purposes of payment of advance tax. Section 30 which provides for appeal against specific orders mikes no mention of....