AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T.D. Sugla, J.—The Tribunal has referred to this court the following three questions as questions of law u/s 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 :
"1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in holding that there was a mistake apparent from the interest of Rs. 70,875 u/s 214 on the advance payment of tax of Rs. 3,00,000 made on March 28, 1969 is concerned ?
Whether the order u/s 154 passed by the Income Tax Officer withdrawing the interest of Rs. 70,875 was valid in law, having regard to the fact that the amount of Rs. 3,00,000 was paid as advance tax and was accepted as such by the Income Tax Officer while making the original assessments ?
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee Rs. 3,00,000 paid on March 28, 1969 ?"
It is evident that the main question involved herein is whether an amount paid towards advance tax after the due date but before the end of the financial year is to be taken into account for the purpose of considering whether or not the assessee had discharged its obligation. The Gujarat High High Court in the case of Chandrakant Damodardas Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, "A" (Company), Rajkot, , and our High court in the case of Pfizer Limited Vs. K.N. Anantharama Aiyar, Commissioner of Income Tax and others, , have held that such a payment is required to be considered as a payment towards advance tax within the meaning of section 210. As a natural corollary, to say the least, it has to be held that the question whether an assessee is entitled to interest u/s 214 on the excess of advance tax payment over the liability is a debatable question. That being so, it has to be further held that withdrawal of such interest by taking recourse to the proceedings u/s 154 is not justified. Accordingly, we answer question Nos. 1 and 3 in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee and question No. 2 in the negative and in favour of the assessee.
No order as to costs.