| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 4245 2008 SLD 4245 (2008) 306 ITR 196 |
Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL No. 5950 OF 2008€ OCTOBER 1, 2008
S.B. SINHA AND CYRIAC, JOSEPH, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
CIVIL APPEAL No. 5950 OF 2008€ OCTOBER 1, 2008
S.B. SINHA AND CYRIAC, JOSEPH, JJ.
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
B.M. Malani*
v.
Commissioner of IncomE tax
Law:
Section:
Section 220 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Collection and recovery of tax - When tax payable and when assessee deemed in default - Assessment years 1990-91 to 1995-96 - During course of raid conducted in residential premises of assessee, certain shares and a demand draft in name of a company were seized - Assessee made a declaration under section 132(4) and opted to pay taxes out of seized shares and securities by requesting department that shares be expeditiously disposed of and sale proceeds therefrom be appropriated towards taxes - However, said request of assessee was not acceded to by department - Assessee filed application under section 245C(1) and Settlement Commission passed order enhancing amount of taxable income - As taxes were not paid by assessee before specified date, ITO levied interest under section 220(2) on him - Assessee filed an application for waiver of interest contending that non-selling of shares and securities by department had caused genuine hardship to him; and that he had failed to pay amount due to unavoidable circumstances - Commissioner, however, rejected that application - Assessee filed writ petition which was dismissed by High Court - Whether since offer made by assessee was voluntary, authorities of department, subject to any statutory interdict, could have considered request of assessee and could have realized its dues - Held, yes - Whether further, since question as to whether default in payment of taxes was due to circumstances which were beyond control of assessee, had not been considered by Commissioner and High Court in its proper perspective, impugned order was to be set aside and matter was to be remitted back to Commissioner for consideration of matter afresh - Held, yes Interpretation of Statutes : Rule of purposive construction FACTS The assessee had been carrying on money lending business and was also trading in shares and securities. During the course of a raid conducted in his residential premises, certain shares and a demand draft in the name of a company were seized. The assessee, in terms of section 132(4), made a declaration and opted to pay taxes out of the seized shares and securities, by requesting the…
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