Law:

Section:

Section 70, read with section 57, of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 - Power of Controller to allow postponement of payment on condition of payment of interest - Whether power to impose interest under section 70 can be exercised only under express terms of section 70 where payment of estate duty is postponed for a definite period as prescribed under provision itself - Held, yes - Whether no action to levy interest can be initiated unless an order is made under section 70 - Held, yes HELD A reading of sections 57 and 70 in juxtaposition would make it clear that the question of postponement of payment of estate duty under section 70 would arise only after final assessment. The mode of payment of the duty assessed provisionally under section 57(1) is provided in sub-section (2) thereof itself. Under that provision an assessee is either required to make the payment of the duty, if any, payable on the provisional assessment, or to furnish security for the payment of that duty. In fact, the entire Act nowhere provides for levy of interest on default of payment of duty. Question of payment of interest under section 70 would arise only when the Controller makes any order under sub-section (1) thereof postponing the payment of duty or the assessee exercising his/her option in a case falling under sub-section (2). The power to charge interest can be exercised only under the express terms of section 70 where payment of estate duty is postponed for a definite period, as prescribed under sub-section (2). [Para 8] The power to impose interest under section 70 can be exercised only under the express terms of section 70 where payment of estate duty is postponed for a definite period as prescribed under that provisions itself. No action to levy interest can be initiated unless an order under section 70 is made. [Para 10] CASES REFERRED TO Smt. Jayakumari v. Asstt. CED [1991] 191 ITR 273/[1992] 61 Taxman 43 (Kar.) [Para 5] and Bettiah Estate v. Union of India[1977] 108 ITR 210 (Pat.) [Para 5]. R.L. Jain for the Applicant. Milind Phadke for the Respondent. JUDGMENT N.K. Jain, J. - The Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore, has at the instance of the Revenue, made this reference under section…

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