TMI Blog1993 (12) TMI 54X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 214, the assessing authority followed the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. The excess tax claimed to have been paid by the petitioner includes the advance tax paid. This fact is necessary to appreciate the contention raised under section 244(1A). The petitioner filed revision petitions before the Commissioner under section 264 of the Act without any success. Hence these writ petitions. Learned counsel for the Revenue raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of these writ petitions. Learned counsel pointed out that the assessee is at Hyderabad and the assessment orders were made at Hyderabad and therefore the cause of action arises only at Hyderabad, and this court has no jurisdiction to entertain t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e by this court will be impracticable because the authorities located in Andhra Pradesh are not expected to disobey the law declared by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. This problem of jurisdiction, with reference to the cause of action, frequently arises under article 226 of the Constitution. Article 226(2) makes it clear that any High Court which exercises the jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action wholly or in part arises may exercise the writ jurisdiction. The basic test is whether the cause of action wholly or in part arises within the territorial jurisdiction of this court to attract its writ petition in any particular case. Under the provisions of the Act an order of the assessing authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rendered by this court in CIT v. Deepchand Kishanlal [1990] 183 ITR 299. The Revenue challenged the said order in W. A. Nos. 2546 of 1990 and 713 of 1991. The writ appeals were dismissed. The Bench pointed out that the Commissioner of Income-tax exercises his revisional jurisdiction in Bangalore and, therefore, part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this court. The Bench further affirmed the decision on the merits regarding the payment of interest by applying the earlier ruling in Deepchand Kishanlal's case [1990] 183 ITR 299 (Kar). I do not find any substantial difference between the aforesaid case and the present case before me. Mr. H. L. Dattu, however, pointed out that in the earlier case the decision of the And ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a similar assessee in Andhra Pradesh, because of the conflicting views of the High Courts. Probably in another State, if the High Court of that State has taken a third view, the authorities in that State shall have to follow the said third view. In such a situation, within this country, three similar assessees are likely to be treated in three modes. Either the law on the particular subject shall have to be settled by the Supreme Court or by Parliament by amendment to the Act. While exercising its jurisdiction this court shall have to apply the law as accepted by this court. Only because there will be certain anomalies this court cannot refuse its jurisdiction. The solution to the problem should be found elsewhere. Probably the Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the date the amount becomes due. Payments made by an assessee after March 31, 1975, if found to be in excess and require to be refunded, interest from the due date of refund shall have to be paid. Since advance tax paid earlier is treated as payment of tax on the date of assessment, the logical consequence is to deem the earlier payment as the payment made by the assessee on the date of assessment and if that date of assessment is after March 31, 1975, interest shall have to be paid on it under section 244(1A). Learned counsel for the Revenue, on the other hand, contends that the language of section 244(1A) shall have to be read as conveying the idea of an actual payment in pursuance of an order of assessment and that there is no scope to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omes to the inevitable corollaries of that state of affairs. Section 219 has bidden to treat the advance tax as the actual payment of tax on the date of assessment. This mandate is not confined to any particular purpose ; if at all the purpose is to adjust the advance payment towards the quantified liability on the date of assessment. Advance payment automatically becomes the current payment. If so, as a consequence of this status conferred on the payment, giving credit to it, the excess shall have to be refunded in the same manner as any other excess payment referred to in section 244(1A) is refunded. I am in respectful agreement with the observations made by the Delhi High Court in this regard. Consequently, it is not possible for me to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
