Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

Limitation period does not apply to withholding tax proceedings – Punjab & Haryana HC

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2011 taxguru.in 845
Case Name
Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Vs M/s H.M.T. Ltd. (Punjab & Haryana High Court)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement


Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) Vs M/s H.M.T. Ltd. (Punjab & Haryana High Court)– There is no specific provision prescribing any limitation for passing the order under Sections 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. According to the learned counsel, in view of Apex Court judgement in M/s Hindustan Times Ltd. Vs. Union of India and others, AIR 1998 SC 688 where no limitation is prescribed, the rule that power should be exercised within reasonable time is not applicable to the facts of the present case. Reference can also made to the judgement of the Kerala High Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Trichur Cooperative Bank Ltd. [2003] 266 ITR 574. It was urged that Section 231 of the Act was omitted from 1.4.1989 and there is no limitation prescribed for passing an order under Sections 201 (1) and 201 (1A) of the Act which are in the nature of effecting recovery of taxes from the assessee in default.

Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Chandigarh Vs M/s H.M.T. Ltd.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

ITA No. 524 of 2009

Date of Decision: 14.07.2011

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J.
1. This order shall dispose of ITA Nos. 524 to 527 of 2009 as according to the learned counsel for the parties, common question of law and facts are involved therein. For brevity, the facts are being taken from ITA No. 524 of 2009.
2. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) against the order dated 5.12.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh, Bench ‘B’, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in ITA No. 784/CHD/2006, relating to the assessment year 1995-96, claiming the following substantial questions of law:-

“i) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld ITAT has erred in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee by holding that four years was the reasonable period to issue show cause under section 201 by the Assessing Officer to assessee though no such limitation was provided in section 201 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

ii) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. ITAT has erred in law in holding that the Assessing Officer was not empowered to issue show cause u/s 201 after a period of four years in view of Hon’ble Supreme Court order passed in the case of Padmasundra Rao & others v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 255 ITR 147?”

2. Put shortly, the facts necessary for adjudication as narrated in the appeal are that the assessee is a Government of India Undertaking. The pay scales of the employees of the assessee were revised by the Government of India w.e.f. 1.1.1992 and the arrears of pay were paid to them between the financial years 1994-95 and 1997- 98. During the assessment years in question, the assessee had made the following payments of arrears of salary to its employees:-

Financial Year Amount Paid
1994-95 Rs. 1,03,48,422/-
1995-96 Rs.2,56,85,573/-
1996-97 Rs.2,72,06,227/-
1997-98 Rs.2,12,06,823/-

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.