SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1955 Supreme(AP) 13

K.SUBBA RAO, BHIMASANKARAM
Boddu Seetharamaswamy – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras – Respondent


RAO, C. J.

( 1 ) THE Income-tax Appelate Tribunal, Madras Branch referred for the opinion of this Court the following questions :"whether an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the levy of penal interest under the provisions of S. 18-A (6) is competent?"

( 2 ) THE facts are in a small compass and they are : The assessee carried on business in the manufacture and sale of groundnut oil, and cake. In making the assessment for the year 1945-46, the Income-tax Officer arrived at an assessable income of Rs. 40,739. 00 as the assessee gave a wrong estimate of the income, he directed him to pay penal interest at 6 per cent under S. 18-A (6) of the Act upon the amount by which the tax already paid by him fell short of 80 percent. of the tax imposed on the basis of the regular assessment. The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of assessment to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and contended, inter alia, that the order imposing penal interest was wrong, but the appeal was dismissed. When he carried on appeal the said matter, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal confirmed the ground that no appal lay against an order under S. 18-A of the Act. The aforesaid questio









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top