| Case ID |
04c18848-6201-4bd0-b044-1420ebe39d82 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
|
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court held that interest would be payable by the Government on excess advance tax even if the tax had not been paid on the due dates but had been paid during the financial year. The decision is significant as it clarifies the interpretation of Section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, establishing that payments made within the financial year should not be excluded from consideration for interest calculations. The court referenced several previous cases to support this ruling, emphasizing that the aggregate amount paid during the financial year is what matters for interest entitlement, not the specific due dates. The order of the Commissioner denying interest was set aside. |
| Summary |
The case revolves around the interpretation of Section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, specifically concerning the payment of interest on excess advance tax. The Gauhati High Court addressed whether the Government is obligated to pay interest on advance tax that was not paid on specified due dates but was paid during the financial year. The court concluded that interest is payable as long as the total amount of advance tax paid exceeds the tax determined on regular assessment. This ruling is crucial for taxpayers as it ensures that payments made within the financial year are considered for interest calculations, thus protecting their rights under the law. The case highlights the importance of timely tax payments and clarifies the legal obligations of the Government in relation to advance tax payments. Keywords such as 'Income Tax', 'Advance Tax', 'Interest Payable', and 'Taxpayer Rights' are significant for understanding the implications of this ruling. |
| Court |
Gauhati High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
B.L. Hansaria,
H.K. Sema
|
| Lawyers |
P.K. Goswami,
J.P. Sarma,
D.N. Choudhury,
K.H. Choudhury
|
| Petitioners |
Moheema Ltd. (No. 1)
|
| Respondents |
Commissioner of Income Tax
|
| Citations |
1990 SLD 1756,
(1990) 182 ITR 187
|
| Other Citations |
CIT v. Jaganath Narayan Kutumbik Trust [1983] 144 ITR 526 (MP),
Chandrakant Damodardas v. ITO [1980] 123 ITR 748 (Guj.),
CIT v. Traub (India) (P.) Ltd. [1979] 118 ITR 525 (Bom.),
CIT v. T.T. Investments and Trades (P.) Ltd. [1984] 148 ITR 347 (Mad.),
Kangundi Industrial Works (P.) Ltd. v. ITO [1980] 121 ITR 339 (AP),
A. Sethumadhavan v. CIT [1980] 122 ITR 587 (Ker.),
Sookerating Tea Co. (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1989] 178 ITR 269 (Gauhati)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
214
|