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

1988 Supreme(Kar) 208

Karnataka High Court
State Bank of Mysore - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of I.T, Karnataka-l, Bangalore - Respondent
Decided On : 06-15-88
I.T.R.C. : 74 of 1981

Advocates:
G.Sarangan, H.RAGHAVENDRA RAO, K.SRINIVASAN INDRAJEETH SHAH

Compensation paid on delayed payment of money due on discounted bills constitutes interest on loans and advances, and is chargeable interest for the purpose of the Interest Tax Act.

Headnote:

Interest Tax Act - Rediscounting of Bills - Sec. 2(7)

Fact of the Case:

The assessee, a Banking Company, filed a return for the year 1976-77 admitting chargeable interest but claimed that re-discount charges paid and interest earned on overdue bills should not be taxed. The I.T.O. rejected both claims and brought the sums to tax. On appeal, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to a deduction for rediscounting but upheld assessment on the interest earned on overdue bills.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the overdue interest on demand bills is 'interest' within the purview of Sec. 2(7) of the Interest Tax Act. It also ruled that the amount charged by the assessee on delayed payment of bills constitutes interest on loans and advances, and is exigible to tax under the Interest Tax Act.

Issues: The issues revolved around whether the overdue interest on demand bills and the sum representing the rediscounting interest paid on bills should be taxed under the Interest Tax Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted that compensation paid on delayed payment of money due on discounted bills constitutes interest on loans and advances, and is chargeable interest for the purpose of the Interest Tax Act. It also emphasized that when there is an agreement between the parties to pay interest, no other question would arise for consideration.

Final Decision: The court ruled in favor of the department, upholding the assessment on the interest earned on overdue bills and rejecting the assessee's claim for non-taxation of the rediscount charges paid.

RAJENDRA BABU, J.

( 1 ) THE assessee is a Banking Company. The assessee filed return for the year 1976 77 admitting the chargeable interest of Rs. 10,17,25,410/ -. The assessee claimed that re-discount charges paid of rs. 36. 40. 206/- and interest earned on overdue bills of Rs. 84,77. 124/- should not be taxed. The I. T. O. rejected both these claims and brought the two sums to tax. On appeal the A. A. C. confirmed the said order. On further appeal, the Tribunal held that in respect of the rediscount, the assessee was entitled to a deduction, but on the other question agreed with the A. A C. that the interest is charged for the user of the funds beyond the stipulated time and the transaction results in earning of interest within the meaning of Sec. 2 (7) of the Interest tax Act and upheld assessment on this item.

( 2 ) THREE questions have been referred by the Tribunal for our opinion and they are :1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the overdue interest on the Demand Bills is interest within the meaning of Sec. 2 (7) of the Interest tax Act ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in holding that the contention of the assessee that the sum of Rs. 36. 40. 206/- representing the redis- counting interest paid on bills did not accrue or arise to the assessee bank by reason of diversion of such discount through a overriding title in favour of the Reserve Bank of India and the industrial Development Bank of India and hence did not form part of the chargeable interests under the provisions of the Interests Tax Act, 1974 ? 3 ). Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is justified in holding that the transaction between the assessee and the IDBI in connection with rediscounting of bills under the scheme of refinancing by the idbi and a similar scheme of RBI is a joint venture whereby the IDBI and the bank joined together in working out a scheme whereby the purchasers are enabled to pay the price in instalments and hence the interest paid by them i. e , the purchasers is to be shared between the two parties viz. RBI and IDBI. "as the instance of the assessee the first question in relation to the overdue interest and demand bills has been referred while the other two questions on deduction in relation to the rediscounting have been referred at the instance of the department.

( 3 ) SO far as the second question relating to the rediscounting of bills is concerned, the same is covered by our order in I. T. R. C. 33/1981 disposed of on 10-6-1988, (Commissioner of Income tax v. Canara Bank ). Now the only question that remains for consideration is whether the overdue interest on the demand bills is 'interest' within the purview of Sec. 2 (7) of the Interest Tax Act.

( 4 ) SRI Sarangan, learned counsel for assessee relying on a decision of the madhya Pradesh High Court in C. I. T. v. State Bank of Indore (69 CTR (MP) 147) contended that though this sum of money may be interest in its wider sense including both interest proper and interest by way of damages, still the provisions of income Tax Act are not attracted since what can be brought within the perview of the Act is only interest on loans and advances. The amount charged by the assessee on delayed payment of bills cannot be held to interest on loans and advances and it was not exigible to tax under the Interest Tax Act. He also relied upon Sec. 32 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and contended that the said provision contemplates only compensation and not the interest at all. When the bank discounts a bill what happens is. the drawee gets a credit from the Bank to the extent of the amount covered by the bill. This position has been explained in law OF BANKING By Paget, 9th Edition at page 415 thus :"the discount of a bill is the purchase of it with, normally, a right of recourse and for a sum less than its face value. The discounter is free to deal with the instrument as he pleases. Discount is a n




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 Back to top