SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.C. SHAH, V. RAMASWAMI AND A.N. GROVER, JJ.
Income Tax Officer, Cannanore, Appellant
Versus
M. K. Mohamad Kunhi, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 1164 of 1966,
D/11-9-1968.
Advocates appeared
Mr. D. Narsaraju, Senior Advocate (M/s. S. A. L. Narayana Rao, R. N. Sachthey and B. D. Sharma, Advocates, with him), for Appellant.
Income-tax Act, 1961 – Section 271(1)(c), 274 (2), 156, 220 (1), 156 (1), 220 (6), 252 to 255, 255 (5), 229 , 222 to 224 and 131 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section 196, 193 and 228 - Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Rules 1963 – Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 227 - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 131, 151, Order XLI, Rules 5 and 6 - Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Section 64 (2) and 64 - Indian Income-tax Act 1922 - Section 45 - Assessment Years - Imposed Penalties - Recovery of Penalty - Whether Appellate Income-tax Tribunal has power, under relevant provisions of Income-tax Act, 1961, to stay recovery of realization of penalty imposed by departmental authorities - Whether law should not be made more liberal so as to enable an assessee who has preferred an appeal, to obtain from appellate forum, a stay of collection of tax, either in whole or in part, on furnishing suitable security, is a matter for legislature to consider – Held, High Court, in present case, referred to a passage from Halsbury s Laws of England, where it is stated that no tax is payable while assessment is subject matter of an appeal, except such part of tax assessed as appears to Commissioners seized of appeal not to be in dispute - This statement is apparently based on provisions of English Statutes and it is not possible to derive any assistance from it - Section 255 (5) of Act does empower Appellate Tribunal to regulate its own procedure, but it is very doubtful if power of stay can be spelt out from that provision - In Court opinion Appellate Tribunal must be held to have power to grant stay as incidental or ancillary to its appellate jurisdiction - This is particularly so when Section 220 (6) deals expressly with a situation when an appeal is pending before Appellate Assistant Commissioner but Act is silent in that behalf when an appeal is pending before Appellate Tribunal - It could well be said that when Section 254 confers appellate jurisdiction, it impliedly grants power of doing all such acts, or employing such means, as are essentially necessary to its execution and that statutory power carries with it duty in proper cases to make such orders for staying proceeding as will prevent appeal if successful from being rendered nugatory - A certain apprehension may legitimately arise in minds of authorities administering Act that if Appellate Tribunals proceed to stay recovery of taxes or penalties payable by or impose on assesses as a matter of course revenue will be put to great loss because of inordinate delay in disposal of appeals by Appellate Tribunals - It is needless to point out that power of stay by Tribunal is not likely to be exercised in a routine way or as a matter of course in view of special nature of taxation and revenue laws - It will only be when a strong prima facie case is made out that tribunal will consider whether to stay recovery proceedings and on what conditions and the stay will be granted in most deserving and appropriate cases where tribunal is satisfied that entire purpose of appeal will be frustrated or rendered nugatory by allowing recovery proceedings to continue during pendency of appeal - Appeal dismissed.
Judgment
GROVER, J.: The short but important question which is involved in this appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Kerala High Court is whether the Appellate Income-tax Tribunal has the power, under the relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter called the Act) to stay the recovery of the realization of the penalty imposed by the departmental authorities on an assessee during the pendency of an appeal before it.
2. The assessee, who is the respondent, was imposed penalties in the sum of Rs. 18,000, 1,700 and 14,000 respectively in respect of the assessment years 1954-55, 1960-61 and 1961-62. These penalties were imposed under S.271(1)(c) read with Section 274 (2) of the Act for concealment of particular income and furnishing inaccurate particulars. The assessee preferred appeals to the Income tax Appellate Tribunal and made an interim prayer for stay of collection of the penalties imposed. The tribunal declined to order any stay holding that it had no power to grant such a prayer. The assessee then moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court held that the Tribunal had the power to stay the proceedings as also the collection of the penalties pending the appeal since that power was incidental and ancillary to its appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal was consequently directed to dispose of the stay application in accordance with law.
3. The relevant provisions of the Act may be first noticed. Section 156 provides that when any tax interest, penalty, fine or any other sum is payable in consequence of any order passed under the Act, the Income tax Officer shall serve upon the assessee a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum so payable. Under Section 220 (1) any amount specified in the notice of demand under Section 156 has to be paid within 35 days of the service of the notice or within such lesser periods as may be specified under the proviso to sub-section (1). If the amount is not paid within the period limited or extended (the assessee can ask for an extension) the assessee shall be deemed to be in default. Sub-section (6) of Section 220 provides that 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, treat the assessee as not being in default so long as the appeal remains pending. Section 221 provides for the imposition of penalty when the assessee is in default. Section 222 to 224 relate to the issuance of a certificate to the Tax Recovery Officer. Under Section 225 the Income-tax Officer can order stay of proceedings, even after the certificate has been issued to the Tax Recovery Officer. It may be mentioned that the last four section in terms relate to recovery of tax, but by virtue of Section 229 any penalty imposed is also recoverable in the same manner. Section 246 to which reference has been made in Section 220 (6) gives the appealable orders against which an assessee may appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Appeals to the Tribunal are dealt with by Sections 252 to 255. Section 252 provides merely for constitution of the tribunal. Section 253 says that any assessee aggrieved by the orders set out in Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub- section (1) may appeal to the tribunal. The Commissioner is also entitled to direct the Income Tax Officer to the an appeal against the order of an Appellate Assistant Commissioner made under Section 250. Section 254 specifies the orders which the tribunal can make. Sub-section (1) which is material may be reproduced below:-
"254. Orders of Appellate Tribunal-(1) The Appellate Tribunal may, after giving both the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit."
Section 255 gives the procedure of the Appellate Tribunal. Sub-sections (5) and (6) of this section need alone be noticed:
"255 (l) . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .
(2) . . . . .. .. . . . . . .
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.