Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2005 (2) TMI 64

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion 217 of the Income-tax Act?" The assessment year is 1982-83 and the relevant accounting period is the financial year ended on March 31, 1982. The Income-tax Officer, while framing the assessment order dated March 28, 1985, issued direction to "charge interest under section 217(1)(a)". Accordingly, interest to the tune of Rs. 39,57,885 was charged under the said provision. The assessee carried the matter in appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals), for the reasons stated in his order of February 3,1986, confirmed the levy of interest. According to the Commissioner (Appeals), the asses-see-company was required to file statement of advance tax even if it may be "nil" statement as per mode of computation laid down in section 209 of the A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t too, only if the pre-condition stipulated in section 208(2) of the Act was not fulfilled. As against the aforesaid submission, Mr. J.P. Shah, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent-assessee, submitted that the order of the Tribunal was justified considering the scheme of the provisions relatable to computation and payment of advance tax. In support of his submission, he placed reliance on the following decisions of the Bombay High Court and the Calcutta High Court: (a) Patel Aluminium P. Ltd. v. Miss K.M. Tawadia, ITO [1987] 165 ITR 99 (Bom); (b) CIT v. Indian Molasses Co. P. Ltd. [1993] 200 ITR 149 (Cal); (c) Director of Income-tax (Exemption) v. Shree Sitaram Public Charitable Trust [1994] 207 ITR 1087 (C....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of the latest previous year (being a year later than the previous year specified in clause (a) of sub-section (1)), on the basis of which, such person has paid tax by way of self-assessment under section 140A of the Act. In other words, for the purposes of computing the starting point of advance tax payable for a particular year, an assessee is required to adopt one of the two bases, namely, the one which is higher : either the total income assessed for the latest previous year by way of regular assessment, or the total income as shown in the return of income which is accompanied by self-assessment tax, and such return of income is relatable to the latest previous year as well as being later in point qua the year for which assessment is c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on which the advance tax is paid. In the eventuality of there being no liability to pay any advance tax, the requirement of filing a statement cannot be read into the provisions de hors the requirement of law to pay advance tax. The entire exercise is for the purposes of ensuring that tax in advance is paid on the stipulated dates, as provided in section 211 of the Act. In these circumstances, it is not possible to accept the contention raised on behalf of the Revenue that even a "nil" statement of advance tax payable was required to be submitted. There being no such legislative intent discernible on a plain reading of the provisions of the Act, the impugned order of the Tribunal does not call for any interference. Any requirement to....