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

2005 (1) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing that tax under section 115JA is not payable in instalments of advance tax, failing to appreciate that the provisions governing the advance tax do not differentiate between tax under section 115JA and that under the general provisions of law." 3. The facts of the case in brief are that the income of the assessee was computed under section 115JA of Income-tax Act and the Assessing Officer charged interest under section 234C amounting to Rs. 35,257. 4. The assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) and challenged the charging of the interest under section 234C. Ld. CIT(A) asked the comments of the Assessing Officer who submitted that section 115JA came into existence w.e.f. 1-4-1997 i.e., assessment year 1997-98 and as per section 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed to tax and the assessee was not aware of the liability of advance tax as on 15-6-1996 and 15-9-1996. She, therefore, held that the interest under section 234C was not chargeable on the income determined under section 115JA. Accordingly the interest charged under section 234C was deleted. Now the department is in appeal. 7. Ld. DR for the revenue vehemently argued that the assessee was liable to pay advance tax because it was immaterial that the income was determined under section 115JA of Income-tax Act. It was stated that section 115JA contains specific provisions relating to applicability of other provisions of Income-tax Act and as per section 208 of Income-tax Act, the assessee was liable to pay advance tax. He contended that since .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Ghaswala [2001] 252 ITR 1. This view has further been confirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers [2003] 259 ITR 449 and in the case of CIT v. Sant Ram Mangat Ram Jewellers [2003] 264 ITR 564. We, therefore, are of the view that the assessee was liable to pay advance tax. However, section 115JA had been brought on statute by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 w.e.f. 1-4-1997 and applicable to the previous year relevant to assessment year 1997-98. The Finance (No. 2) Act, 1996 got the assent of Hon'ble President of India on 28-9-1996 and before this date this section was not on statute. Admittedly first instalment of the advance tax becomes due on 15th June and the second on 15th September in the case of the as .....

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