Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 389 (1.61 seconds)
Documents citing Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 15 July, 1986

Petrosil Oil Company Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 September, 1993

89. As regards the second question, both sides fairly state that this question is squarely covered by the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in that case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1986] 160 ITR 961. The assessee has claimed that they were not liable to levy. Thus, they have disputed liability. An appeal is maintainable. In any event on the view that I have taken, i.e., that the assessee is a domestic company or which the public are substantially interested, the second question would no longer survive. I am informed that the advance tax which had been paid by the assessee would cover the entire tax liability.
Bombay High Court Cites 60 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Sarabhai Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. (Now Known ... vs The Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 6 February, 2002

[m-2] In Commissioner of Income Tax v. Gordhanbhai Jethabhai, reported in 205 ITR 279, this Court applying the decision in Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. (supra), held that the history of Section 215 and the way it has worked and also the case law clearly indicate that interest becomes payable by the assessee as a result of operation of law and it is not made dependent upon the discretion of the Income Tax Officer. The discretion which is conferred upon the Income Tax Officer is not with respect to determination of payability of interest but with respect to reduction or waiver of interest payable by the assessee. While deciding whether interest under Section 215(1) is payable by the assessee or not, what the Income Tax Officer has to consider is whether the required conditions are satisfied or not, and he would be under no obligation to consider whether interest should be reduced or waived, which question would arise only after payment of interest is determined.
Gujarat High Court Cites 81 - Cited by 16 - K A Puj - Full Document

Naveen Glass Products, Firozabad vs Assessee on 27 August, 2012

Ld Authorised Representative tried to distinguish the said judgement by referring the judgement of Apex Court in the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. vs. CIT, 160 ITR 961 (SC) and other judgements as cited in his argument that charging of interest is part and parcel of assessment proceedings. Therefore, charging of interest comes under the word assessed. Once the assessee challenges the assessed includes interest, therefore, 22 ITA No.471/Agr/2010 & Others M/s Naveen Glass Products & Others the appeal is maintainable under section 246 of the Act. It has also been submitted that denial of liability may be full or partial.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Agra Cites 103 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Union Home Products Ltd. vs Union Of India And Another on 24 February, 1995

"Another submission made on behalf of the petitioner was that at least he should have been heard before treating him as a defaulter and fixing the liability under section 13(2) of the Act. The said submission is also untenable in view of the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court as also the decision of this court in Sterling Construction and Trading Co.'s case [1973] 32 STC 235.
Karnataka High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 59 - T S Thakur - Full Document

N. Gopalakrishnan And Ors. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax And Anr. on 26 June, 1998

In the case reported in Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. CIT , it has been held that interest is levied under Section 139(8) or Section 215 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, because by reason of the omission or default mentioned in the respective provision, the Revenue is deprived of the benefit of the tax for the period during which it has remained unpaid. In that case, the return had been furnished under Section 139 with delay and it will be a question merely of satisfying the relevant authority that there are circumstances calling for a reduction or waiver of the interest. It is significant to note that in that case the assesses was assessed to income-tax from the assessment year 1967-68. Interest under Sub-section (8) of Section 139 of the Income-tax Act amounting to Rs. 56,391 and interest under Section 215 of that Act amounting to Rs. 9,42,336 subsequently reduced to Rs. 5,07,880 were levied against the appellant. According to the appellant, there was ample and clear justification for the delay in furnishing the return under Section 139 and for payment of advance tax under Section 212 at a figure less than 75 per cent, of the assessed tax. Whereas it is significant to note that the case on hand is one where the petitioners herein for the first time had made the assessment that too voluntarily for several years. Therefore, factually both the cases are different and hence, the case relied on by the respondents is not in any way helping them in advancing their case.
Madras High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sarabhai Chemicals (P) Ltd. vs Cit on 6 February, 2002

(m-2) In CIT v. Gordhanbhai Jethabhai (1994) 205 ITR 279 (Guj) , this court applying the decision in Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. (supra) held that the history of section 215 and the way it has worked and also the case law clearly indicate that interest becomes payable by the assessee as a result of operation of law and it is not made dependent upon the discretion of the Income Tax Officer. The discretion which is conferred upon the Income Tax Officer is not with respect to determination of payability of interest but with respect to reduction or waiver of interest payable by the assessee. While deciding whether interest under section 215(1) is payable by the assessee or not, what the Income Tax Officer has to consider is whether the required conditions are satisfied or not, and he would be under no obligation to consider whether interest should be reduced or waived, which question would arise only after payment of interest is determined.
Gujarat High Court Cites 78 - Cited by 15 - Full Document

Om Rice Mills vs Income-Tax Officer on 27 January, 1989

11. We are of the opinion that in view of the abovementioned judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. (supra) the law is now well settled that levy of interest under Section 139(8) is part of the process of assessment. In fact, Supreme Court laid down this law in a case where the issue for consideration was of waiver or reduction in the levy of interest. In view of this development in law, the judgments of various High Courts, which preceded this judgment, regarding the levy of interest on the assessee being a part of the process of assessment or not, no longer can be said to hold the field. Therefore, we have to proceed on the premise that charging of interest under Section 139(8) and under Section 217 is part of the process of assessment proceedings and anything done about that will form part of the assessment, which if otherwise open for review to the Commissioner under Section 263 would come in for consideration for lawful assumption of jurisdiction. Therefore, in this case, since, the ITO neither recorded that he was satisfied that interest under Section 139(8) and Section 217 was not chargeable nor he issued any directions for charging of interest, there was no deliberated application of his mind to the issue. In fact, the statute provides for waiver or reduction of interest. The discretion vested in the ITO ranges between a right to waive interest or to reduce it. His order being a quasi-judicial in nature, it must state some reason for the waiver or reduction of interest. Interest cannot altogether be waived by in action.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 21 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

S.K. Patel Family Trust vs Asstt. Cit on 10 January, 2001

"10. The State is empowered by the legislature to raise revenue through the mode prescribed in the Act so the State should not be the sufferer on account of the delay caused by the taxpayer in payment of the tax due. The provision for charging interest would have been introduced in order to compensate the State (or the revenue) for the loss occasioned due to delay in paying the tax (vide CIT v. M. Chandra Sekhar (1985) 151 ITR 433 (SC) and Central Provisions Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1986) 160 ITR 961 (SC). When interpreting such a provision in a taxing statute a construction which would preserve the purpose of the provision much be adopted. It is well-settled that in interpreting a taxing statute normally, there is no scope for consideration of principles of equity.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 84 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Kangra Bajri Co. vs A.C.I.T. [Alongwith I.T.A. Nos. 515 To ... on 26 November, 2002

9. The ld. D.R. has submitted that levy of interest is statutory and mere omission on the part of the AO to charge interest at the time of completing the re-assessment does not mean that such mistake could not be rectified Under Section 154. She has relied on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. v. CIT, supra, and the judgment of Patna High Court in the case of CIT v. Bishwanath Tulsyan. We have carefully gone through the aforesaid judgments but we are of the opinion that the same are clearly distinguishable on facts.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh Cites 43 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next