| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1983 SLG 881 1983 SLD 881 (1983) 141 ITR 120 |
Kerala High Court
O.P. No. 2277 OF 1978-D
KOCHU THOMMEN, J
K.S. Paripoornan for the Petitioner. P.K. Ravindranatha for the
Respondent.
O.P. No. 2277 OF 1978-D
KOCHU THOMMEN, J
K.S. Paripoornan for the Petitioner. P.K. Ravindranatha for the
Respondent.
K.P. Abdul Kareem Haji
v.
Income Tax Officer
Law:
Section:
Section 220(2) of the income-tax act, 1961- Interest-Payable when assessee deemed in default-Assessment order creating tax demand set aside in appeal by aac but restored by tribunal-Whether assessee's claim that no interest could be charged under section 220(2) from the date of aac's order to the date of tribunal's order justified-Held, on facts, no Facts An amount of Rs. 84,000 was seized from one P by the Enforcement Directorate during the accounting year relevant for the assessment year 1970-71. The assessee claimed that the sum belonged to him. The ITO made assessments on P, as well as on the assessee by way of a protective measure, by his orders dated 1-12-1973. On appeal, the AAC set aside both the assessment orders by his order dated 31-1-1975. On further appeal, the Tribunal by its order dated 31-7-1977 affirmed the decision of the AAC relating to P, but reversed his decision in the case of the assessee and restored the order of the ITO. Thereafter, the ITO passed an order whereby he charged interest from the assessee under section 220(2) on the unpaid amount of tax of Rs. 60,278 from the date of his original assessment order. On revision, the Commissioner confirmed the ITO's action. On writ petition, the assessee challenged the correctness of the interest charged on the ground that insofar as the ITO's order was set aside by the AAC, no interest had become payable by the assessee on the tax demanded from the date of the AAC's order to the date of the Tribunal's order reversing the AAC's order. Held The order of a judicial or a quasi-judicial authority is not final during the time allowed for filing an appeal or the pendency of an appeal. In the absence of any statutory provision to the contrary or an interim stay granted by a competent authority, the order, although not final, is provisionally executable, subject to restoration. In the instant case, the finality of the ITO's order was qualified by and subject to the appeal which was taken before the AAC. Again, the order of the AAC itself was likewise provisional during the period allowed for filing an appeal or during the pendency of appeal and only when the Tribunal finally set aside the AAC's order…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492