V KUNHIKANNAN Vs. AGRL INCOME-TAX OFFICER
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Agrl Income-Tax Officer
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) For the period November 1, 1956, to March 31, 1958, the petitioner was assessed to agricultural income-tax by order dated February 10, 1962. The appeal against this order was dismissed on November 18, 1962. Thereafter, by Ex. P-2 notice dated March 18, 1957, the petitioner was informed that revenue recovery proceedings would be taken against him unless the tax due is remitted on or before March 25, 1967. He was further informed that in default of remittance of the said amount within the said date, the 1st respondent would be compelled to impose a penalty on the petitioner. Exhibit P-2 notice refers to the fact that the petitioner had not remitted the tax due, as required by the letter dated March 3, 1957.
(2.) The petitioner objects to this notice on the ground that recovery proceedings are barred by reason of Section 41(4) of the Agricultural Income-tax Act, which reads :
"41. (4) No proceeding for the recovery of any sum payable under this Act shall be commenced after the expiration of three years from the latest day fixed for payment in the notice of demand served under Section 30 or where the assessee has been treated as not being in default under the proviso to Section 40 pending his appeal, after the expiration of three years from the date on which the appeal is decided."
(3.) That proceedings for "recovery" are barred by reason of the above provision is not disputed, and cannot be disputed. But Ex. P-3 also threatens the petitioner with penalty proceedings in case of default in paying the tax. I have not been shown any provision in the statute which places an embargo on imposing penalty beyond a certain time from the date of the assessment.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.