| Case ID |
1a744939-881d-4f48-b976-51dd070f9290 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
ITR NO. 7 OF 1996 |
| Decision Date |
Sep 25, 2006 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the charging of interest under sections 139(8) and 217 of the Income-tax Act. The case involved the interpretation of whether interest could be charged in the absence of explicit directions in the assessment order. The court found that the demand notice part of the assessment order clearly indicated the charging of interest and its working. The Tribunal's deletion of interest was held to be unjustified, reaffirming the position established in prior cases, including Vinod Khurana v. CIT. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the interpretation of the Income-tax Act, specifically sections concerning the charging of interest for late filing of income tax returns. The Punjab and Haryana High Court examined the validity of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal's decision to delete interest charges due to the lack of explicit directions in the assessment order. The court clarified that the demand notice, being part of the assessment order, sufficiently indicated the calculation of interest owed. The ruling emphasized the importance of following established precedents, particularly the principles outlined in the Supreme Court's decision in Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT. This case underscores the necessity for tax authorities to clearly communicate interest charges in assessment orders and the implications of procedural compliance in tax assessments. Key terms include 'Income-tax Act', 'interest for late filing', and 'tax assessment procedures'. |
| Court |
Punjab and Haryana High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL,
RAJESH BINDAL
|
| Lawyers |
Dr. N.L. Sharda
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Vijay Yarn & Textiles (P.) Ltd.
|
| Citations |
2008 SLD 2343,
(2008) 303 ITR 219
|
| Other Citations |
Vinod Khurana v. CIT [2002] 253 ITR 578,
Kalyankumar Ray v. CIT [1991] 191 ITR 634,
CIT v. Himalaya Drug Co. [1982] 135 ITR 368 (All)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
139(8),
215,
217
|