TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 36X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an advance tax after December 15, 1985 but paid on February 8, 1986, during the financial year has been rightly treated as advance tax and has been taken into consideration for the purposes of granting interest under section 7B - we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue - - - - - Dated:- 10-5-2005 - Judge(s) : R. K. AGRAWAL., RAJES KUMAR. JUDGMENT The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the assessment year 1986-87 for opinion to this court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, learned Income-tax Appellate Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. We have heard learned standing counsel on behalf of the Revenue and Sri S.D. Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee-respondent. Learned standing counsel submitted that since a sum of Rs. 18 lakhs which was due to be payable by December 15, 1985 was not paid within the time stipulated under section 7A(4)(a), interest under section 7B of the Act was not payable and the Tribunal has erred in granting the interest under section 7B of the Act. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that any amount paid during the financial year, was in the nature of an advance tax and interest under section 7B of the Act was payable. In respect of his contention, he relied upon various decisions of the hon'ble High Court and the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gregate sum of any instalments of advance tax paid during any financial year. The provision of section 7B of the Companies (Profits) Surtax Act, 1964 is similar to section 214 of the Income-tax Act. We find that the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the cases of J. and J. Dechane v. CIT [1990] 182 ITR 345; Bakelite Hylam Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 202 ITR 145 [FB], the Bombay High Court in the case of Harinagar Sugar Mills Ltd. v. First ITO [1991] 188 ITR 135; the Calcutta High Court in the cases of CIT v. Ajoy Paper Mills Ltd. [1990] 181 ITR 454; CIT v. Graphite India Ltd. [1994] 209 ITR 88, 96; the Gujarat High Court in the cases of Chimanlal S. Patel v. CIT [1994] 210 ITR 419, 421; Chandrakant Damodardas v. ITO [1980] 123 ITR 748; Anup Engineering ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any financial year even if the date is subsequent to the dates stipulated under section 211 for payment of such instalments. The Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT v. Kohinoor Flour Mills [1975] 99 ITR 54 has held that in computing the penalty under section 273(b) of the Act, the amount of tax paid by the assessee subsequent to the date prescribed for payment of advance tax should be treated as valid advance tax and should be deducted from 75 per cent, of the tax determined. The aforesaid decision has been affirmed by the apex court in CIT v. Kohinoor Floor Mills P. Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 585. Thus, the amount of advance tax which is paid after the prescribed date, is to be treated as advance tax. The view taken by various High Courts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
