SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.C. SHAH, V. RAMASWAMI AND A.N. GROVER, JJ,
The Income-tax Officer, III Mangalore, Appellant
Versus
M. Damodar Bhat, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 1654 of 1967,
D/-6-9-1968.
Advocates appeared
Mr. B. Sen, Senior Advocate (M/s. R. Gopalakrishnan, R. N. Sachthey and B. D. Sharma, Advocates, with him), for Appellant; M/s. K. Srinivasan, M. K. Ramamurthi,Vineet Kumar and Mrs. Shyamala Pappu, Advocates, for Respondent
Income-tax Act, 1961 – Section 226 (3), 156, 221, 222, 246, 220 to 234 and 220 (6) - Income-tax Act, 1922 - Section 29 - General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section 6 - Wealth-tax Act, 1957 - Section 2 (m) - Assessment Years - Arrears in Income-Tax - Penalty - Whether High Court was right in taking view that Income-tax Officer did not properly exercise statutory discretion in issuing impugned notice with regard to first item - Whether Income-tax Officer has arbitrarily exercised his discretion – Held, In present case, there is additional circumstance that assessments of tax and penalty have been made against respondent and demand notices have also been issued under Section 156 of new Act - It is therefore not possible to argue that amount of tax and penalty for assessment years were not "due by assessee" when notice under Section 226 (3) of new Act was issued – Court is accordingly of opinion that Mr. Srinivasan is unable to make good his argument on this aspect of case - It follows therefore that impugned notice was validly issued as regards items 4 and 5, viz., Penalty for assessment year, i. e., Rs. 1,890 and tax for assessment year i. e., Rs. 64,307.90 - It was argued on behalf of respondent that there was an appeal pending with Appellate Assistant Commissioner against order of assessment and therefore it was incumbent upon Incometax Officer to exercise statutory discretion properly under Section 220 (6) of new Act in treating assessor as being in default - Finding of High Court is that Income-tax Officer "was not shown to have applied his mind to any of facts relevant to proper exercise of his discretion" - In Court opinion, finding of High Court cannot be upheld, because respondent has not alleged in his writ petition any specific particulars in support of his case that Income-tax officer has exercised his discretion in an arbitrary manner - In paragraph 12 (b) of writ petition respondent had merely said that " order of Income-tax Officer made under Section 220 was arbitrary and capricious"- No other particulars were given by respondent in his writ petition to show in what way order was arbitrary or capricious - In result Court hold that respondent is unable to substantiate, his case that impugned notice is in any way defective with regard to item No. 1, i. e. tax for assessment year amounting to Rs. 7,056.15 - Appeal allowed.
Judgement
RAMASWAMI, J.: This appeal is brought by certificate on behalf of the III Income-tax Officer, Mangalore from the judgment of the Mysore High Court dated February 1, 1967 in Writ Petition No. 846 of 1965 holding that the notice under S. 226 (3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter called the new Act , bearing Nos. 770-d/60-61, 61-62, 62-68 and 63-64 issued by the III Income-tax Officer to M/s. Rajarajeswari Motor Service, Mangalore, produced as Ex. VIII with the writ petition was invalid and inoperative in respect of the following items of tax and penalty included therein:-
1. Tax for the assessment year 1960-61 Rs. 7,056.50
2. Tax for the assessment year1961-62 Rs. 485.55
3. Penalty for 1962-63 Rs. 1,890.00
4. Tax for the assessment year 1963-64 Rs. 64,307.90
and quashing the notice to that extent.
2. The impugned notice was issued under S. 226 (3) of the new Act. The respondent Sri M. Damodar Bhat was in arrears in respect of income-tax and penalty levied on him in respect of three or four assessment years. The total amount shown as due in the notice was Rs. 74,086.02 and was made up as follows:
1. Tax for the assessment year 1960-61 Rs. 7,056.15
2. Tax for the assessment year1961-62 Rs. 485.55
3. Balance of tax for the assessment year 1962-63 Rs. 346.42
4. Penalty for assessment year1962-63 Rs. 1,890.00
5. Tax for the assessment year1963-64 Rs. 64,307.90
Rs. 74,086.02
3. It is necessary at this stage to set out the relevant provisions of the Incometax Act, 1961 (Act 43 of 1961) and of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (Act 11 of 1922), hereinafter referred to as the old Act. Section 156 of the new Act is to the following effect:
"Notice of demand.- When Any tax, Interest, penalty, fine or Any other sum is payable in consequence of any order passed under this Act, the Income-tax Officer shall serve upon the assessee a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum so payable." Sections 220, 221 and 222 of the new Act provide:
"220. When tax payable and when assessee deemed in default.- (1) Any amount, otherwise than by way of advance tax specified as payable in a notice of demand under Section 156 shall be paid within thirty-five days of the service of the notice at the place and to the person mentioned in the notice:
* * * * * *
(2) If the amount specified in any notice of demand under Section 156 is not paid within the period limited under sub-section (1), the assessee shall be liable to pay simple interest at nine per cent per annum from the day commencing after the end of the period mentioned in sub-section (1):
* * * * * *
(4) If the amount is not paid within the time limited under sub-section (1) or extended under sub-section (3), as the case may be, at the place and to the person mentioned in the said notice the assessee shall be deemed to be in default.
* * * * * *
(6) Where an assessee has presented an appeal under Section 246 the Income-tax Officer may, in his discretion, and subject to such conditions as he may think fit to impose in the circumstances of the case, treat the assessee as not being in default in respect of the amount in dispute in the appeal, even though the time for payment as expired, as long as such appeal remains undisposed of.
* * * * * *"
221. Penalty payable when tax in default.- (1) When an assessee is in default or is deemed to be in default in making a payment of tax, he shall, in addition to the amount of the arrears and the amount of interest payable under subsection (2) of Section 220, be liable to pay by way of penalty, an amount which, in the case of a continuing default, may be increased from time to time, so, however, that the total amount of penalty does not exceed the amount of tax in arrears:
Provided that before levying any such penalty the assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
(2) Where as a result of any final order the amount of tax, with respect to the default in the payment of which the penalty was levied, has been wholly reduced, the penalty levi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.