SHATRUSAILYA DIGVIJAYSINGH JADEJA vs. COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX, RAJKOT

C.A. No.-004403-004410 - 2003Supreme Court01 September 20052 pages
For Petitioner: BHARGAVA V. DESAIFor Respondent: B. V. BALARAM DAS
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Supreme Court hold?

The Supreme Court held that the appellant was not liable to pay interest on the tax arrears as the amount was not ascertainable due to the Designated Authority's erroneous rejection of the declarations. The Court set aside the additional direction for interest payment.

What were the facts?

The appellant filed declarations under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, which were initially rejected by the Designated Authority. The High Court held the declarations competent and directed the authority to proceed, but also directed the appellant to pay interest on the tax arrears.

What were the issues?

Whether interest is payable on tax arrears under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme when the Designated Authority wrongly rejects the assessee's declarations, making the tax amount unascertainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 88,Section 90,Section 90(1),Section 92,Section 87(f)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 4403-4410 of 2003 PETITIONER: Shatrusailya Digvijaysingh Jadeja RESPONDENT: Commissioner of Income Tax,Rajkot. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/09/2005 BENCH: B.P. SINGH & S.H. KAPADIA

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T KAPADIA, J.

These appeals by special leave have been filed against an additional direction given by the Gujarat High Court vide judgment dated 25.9.2002 holding the appellant liable to pay interest under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998 (for short "the Scheme") on the tax arrears to be determined by the designated authority (for short "DA").

The appellant filed a writ petition in the Gujarat High Court against the rejection of the declarations made by the assessee under the said Scheme.

By the impugned judgment, the High Court held that the declarations filed by the appellant herein were competent as the assessee’s revision applications were pending on the date of filing of the declarations. The department was, therefore, directed to entertain the declarations, to determine the amount payable and to grant a certificate under se

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 90

All 1,075 judgments and leading authorities on Section 90 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →