Ram Saran v. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged imposition of tax interest claiming funds were attached and accounted for early. Court exercised writ jurisdiction to restrict liability, confirming partial waiver of sections 234A/C but limiting 234B interest to a specific delayed period.
What did the court decide?
Impugned order set aside/modified; petitioner's interest liability restricted to Section 234B for the period 15.12.1998 to 23.12.1998.
What the court decided
�������������������������������������������� ����������
Civil Writ Petition�7207 of 2003 (O&M) Date of decision:� 06.12.2016
Ram Saran
...Petitioner
Versus
. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Panchkula
...Respondent
������������������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������
Present:� Mr. Alok Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Tajender K. Joshi, Advocate, for the respondent. * * * *
��������������������������
The petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the respondents insofar as they have imposed interest under sections 234�A and 234�B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).
- This is an unusual case with unusual facts. The petitioner’s case is that he has actually filed the returns and paid the tax even before the due dates.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is liable for interest under sections 234A and 234B given the attachment of funds before due dates and advisory instructions to pay tax.
Whether interest under section 234B is restricted to the period of actual delay excluding the time taken by the department to process the request for adjustment.
Whether section 119(2)(a) orders against which no appeal is maintainable warrant exercise of writ jurisdiction for relief.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Ram Saran
- respondent
Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Haryana, Panchkula
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Punjab & Haryana HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- CWP/7207/2003
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court