Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (3) TMI 1502

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the name of "Hotel Utsav". The dispute in the present case pertains to payment of luxury tax under the provisions of the Gujarat Tax on Luxuries (Hotels and Lodging Houses) Act, 1977 (the Act) for the period from June 27, 1991 to March 25, 1994. During this period, there was delay regarding payment of some portion of luxury tax ranging from 12 to 141 days. By a notice issued in August, 1994, the petitioner was informed that an amount of Rs. 14,328.50 was liable to be recovered from it for the period April, 1991 to February, 1994 for delayed payment of luxury tax and was called upon to deposit the same within a period of seven days. It was further stated that if the interest is not paid within the said period the same would be recovered as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the District Collector has not decided the important legal contention raised by the petitioner as to whether under the provisions contained in section 7A of the Act, interest was payable at the rate of two per cent per month or per year. Inviting attention to the provisions of section 7A of the Act, it was submitted that the two per cent stated therein is not qualified either by month or year. It was submitted that if there is no qualification to the rate of interest, it cannot be said that the same is for per month. Inviting attention to the provisions of section 220 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 and sub-section (4A) of section 47 of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, it wa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ot warrant any interference by this court. In rejoinder, Mr. M. C. Bhatt, learned advocate, submitted that the Statement of Objects and Reasons can certainly be looked into, but that would not change the intention of the Legislature when the words used in the statute are clear. It was submitted that on a plain reading of the provision, the normal interpretation would be that the interest is to be levied at the rate of two per cent per annum. It was also submitted that the Statement of Objects and Reasons produced by the learned Assistant Government Pleader pertains to the Ordinance which was issued prior to the amendment in the Act and cannot be said to be the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the amendment Act by virtue of which section .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... per cent for the period for which the tax remains unpaid. In other words, on the amount of tax due at the end of each month or part thereof, simple interest has to be calculated at the rate of two per cent per month on the amount of tax that remains unpaid. If the interpretation as canvassed on behalf of the petitioner were to be accepted it would be difficult to assign any meaning to the words "each month or part thereof". It is well-settled legal position that while interpreting the provisions of a statute care has to be taken that no part of the statute is rendered meaningless or otiose. Besides, from the language employed in the statute there is nothing to indicate any legislative intent to levy interest at the rate of two per cent per .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the petitioner. It is settled legal position that for determining the purpose of the legislation, it is permissible to refer to the Statement of Objects and Reasons to look into the circumstances which were prevalent when the law was enacted and which necessitated the passing of the enactment. The facts stated in the preamble and the Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to any legislation are evidence of legislative judgment. They indicate the thought process of the elected representatives of the people and their cognizance of the prevalent state of affairs, impelling them to enact the law. The contention that the Statement of Objects and Reasons pertains to the ordinance and not to the Act is required to be stated to be rejected. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates