Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N. SANTOSH HEGDE AND B .P. SINGH, JJ.
ARVIND SUD (1) PETITIONER
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERSRESPONDENTS.
SLP (C) NO. 14196 OF 2003, DECIDED ON FEBRUARY 24, 2004
ADVOCATES WHO APPEARED IN THIS CASE:
VIPIN GOGIA, JASPREET GOGIA AND K.K. GOGNA, ADVOCATES, FOR THE PETITIONER;
NIKHIL SAKHARDANDE, B.V. BALARAM DAS AND MS NARESH BAKSHI, ADVOCATES, FOR THE RESPONDENTS.
Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 2(1)(ix) - Liability to pay income tax on price of car won in a lottery - Petitioner contending that he was liable to pay tax only from 1995 whereas department has charged interest from 1993 - Department submitting that tax demanded is only for the period 1.4.1995 i.e. period subsequent to petitioner getting pries - Petitioner granted time to file proper affidavit to substantiate its contention - [Para ]
ORDER
A SHORT QUESTION REMAINS TO BE CONSIDERED IN THIS PETITION. WE NOTICE THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE IN REGARD TO THE LIABILITY OF THE PETITIONER TO PAY THE TAX AND INTEREST TO THE BELATED PAYMENT OF SUCH TAX ON THE VALUE OF MARUTI CAR WON BY HIM IN A LOTTERY. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER SUBMITS THAT THE DEPARTMENT .HAS CHARGED INTEREST FROM THE YEAR 1993, WHILE HE WAS LIABLE TO PAY TAX ONLY FROM 1995. THE LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE DEPARTMENT SUBMITS THAT IT IS NOT CORRECT AND THE TAX DEMANDED AND CALCULATED IS ONLY FOR THE PERIOD AFTER 1-4-1995, A PERIOD SUBSEQUENT TO THE PETITIONER GETTING THE PRIZE. THEREFORE, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER SEEKS SOME TIME TO FILE PROPER AFFIDAVIT TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CONTENTION THAT INTEREST DEMANDED AND CALCULATED BY WAY OF TAX IS FROM THE YEAR 1993 ITSELF. FOUR WEEKS TIME IS GRANTED FOR THE SAID PURPOSE.
COURT MASTERS
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
