High Court Karnataka High Court

The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs United India Insurance Co Ltd on 21 October, 2008

Karnataka High Court
The Commissioner Of Income Tax vs United India Insurance Co Ltd on 21 October, 2008
Author: K.Sreedhar Rao C.R.Kumaraswamy


IN Tflfi HEGH 6033? my xfigmmmaxn, BRNERLQEE
namaa THIS THE 21″ may my G£TOBER; 2608

PRESENT

mam Hmw*BLE MR. suawzcn K.aEEEsaAR-$§0 f ‘.

Ann A_MHM

?%m amH*BLE fifi- 3¥$TI5E ¢;g§$fi3A§A$w$mx”3 ‘”

ITA N9 33% as 299$”

BETWEEN

anl–:uwIIIIlnuaII&

1 TEE CQHMKSSIQNER as zmdgfim wax ;F
U R BU1L§:m§._ ‘ ‘w “¥= ‘r’

@EEENS-£fi§&¥x;,
B&N$&LG$E?,_aK

2 THE :3c@mE’:Ax5m§E:m3n gyms;
Wfikfi 15:3. .1′ V J
g R E$ILfiIfiG~”

. mfigmfia a5Ab*-HM. …..

“A’EAwQ&L6RE
»’~_ . v’.’= … APEELLANTS

.**:3y5§&£ : M V 5EsHncHALA.»Amv.>

EH3 :

4….-.;-.. _……. …..

“g ;*mmfiwEm INDIA IfiSURfiNEE so LTB

‘ }uww?aaNaALmRE

§fiIVI3IfiNfiL OFEIEE 5’

.,. RESPDNEENT

flhia I?A is filed uf3.2fi0ma Gfi I.T.Act, 19fi1

ariaimg mat cf flxdar dated O6w$9~20fl? gaaaed
in: Eifik Na.1?4?flBNGf2GG§, flax the .Asaas3ment
fear 2$fl$*2%$l, gzayimg that this Hbn’ble
fimurt may be pleased ta:

¢£%//,

igauaaafl mrstisssa tax thee raaponaant, after ansquiry

fmzmd €:.1:m’c tha raapmzndent ham viwlatafi. tltfia

mandate rszuf Sac. 194%}. Hsanae, €.’iiIISE3Z&3§§._ fii;3f1é ‘~

mmmparxy tr; deprmii: tfrm TBS amc>un*;.?; __:

intéx-amt am the T1253 amazurxt.

4% 3 ‘fixes C,E.T, in ap§3az3″‘i;_ :é:»;$eiifii:%*cz..n éd.,

c:”>’X!fi.Q-N53 ef tbs $3.0, The F§@}:%.£=Le’ 1..1atAé
oapgeafi. at ‘mm in3″gt.a4f;;aa xaésyaniitiant
pa1:t.Zy allwwerfi the L’vV:.g:’fiv’i:4:-;.c::’c::§.<;kz1 ta
gxfjr zizmtawaat Véaiszia, the

raat ::::fi V. ' manfirmad. 'rm

z"e:apat2r;e;e:.iza¥;:1*:Q"'L.3;sa , under the mzder: tat:

__$pli't..«§;§gm.%.L'*5yré&;;:§.__;:;gf§;§m tha intaraat liability

Vzfm:;ms.s,::Zr;s_..V_«$~:E'«..1:'12e aaaeaamant 'year. The revenue

agg;r1siAé:::~'efi .B:g [::§';'§xa:a azretgr 9f the Trihunaj. in

fianyifig"..'€"s't:;e ;§.r1.taa:1:aa't: ham filed the appeal. The

= V'.:;';5§'a§$::32':fiarfi;' has zmt gzrafaxtrafi any appeal

'agaigmfist the =-.:'*.»x;s:.'u3$.z' ts» the extent: adverse ts: its

V' "'i31 tax~rm&%3t .

In ‘the abwe appeaig the folimwing
Bllbfitfizltifil queatiwna tzaf law are fmrmulated.

fear ecxmmaigziarantiaxnz

4%

H

“ifi Whathar tha ?ribunfil waa amrract in
aalfiimg that an intmreat aged be paid by the

aaaeaaaa far nwm deductian of Tvfiibeimg

cwnawqmantial} afitaz having bald that tha

aaaeaa$& waa iiablfi ta defiant TBS an ;tfia =

imzeraat ammymnant paifi by having zemandédflt¢I;.”

varify caxtain facts and :e*cQmgufi& £he

imtaxaat? g””*

ii} fihathfixr tha Trihuaal ‘waS,T&arta¢:$..ifiLu”

haidimg that thare waa n@W§pedifiaVp§fi€ifi;9n
ta fiaduat TEE befmra inaartiafi Qf dlafisé i$ ta

aaatslmn mama; at t}.m__ Aw:”””a.;.i.;::; VEhg.mf§:s:~*a,”‘ the

aaaeaae3″fififie$ a E$m$fi§d£ ififivreaamnable cause
hmfi mm: dfldust$dfl§&fi¥$hd’hena$; nc intexeat
made: @amfi;Qn»2fi1{lfi% %a$ laviable when sunk a

ylwa waa,nwt”£aia5d?7″v

‘.°fi, ffi%finfiibunai field “”” that the zeapanfienta

aha .%@tfl*§nfii§§ad. ta pay interast an the

‘ “mmflefim§t3&~§flS ammmnt aincfi the said liability

” §fi@*;m tfia nature of pwnalty. In this regard,

«”tfifi*tribumal relied ugmn the deciaimn mf thia

“%”‘»:{;:«7:;§:: in Mittai Stael Ltd. Vs. cm, 249 Im

~ -..”:’€;W.

GP

liahifiity, Tfie tribunai hag rightky dixaat§&

that the intaxeat yaid ab$va Rs.5Q,$flGf-fiaQ:§ fl[‘

ha mplit &m$ £§ra@d away thg periafi,frflm fiha

it-1~

date intareat ia fiifififitfifi ta fig fi§$$¥ti§fi
gaymemt. If tha £pEaa§x Qva&1Ei5 gifigfiwzifi
majarity gfi gages, tha £a§p&@dafit flfi&y 3nat
imam: liability ta pa%*any’%§§;_:in th% é%ant;
Eha twspmndgnt §Qmita fi§S $§§ungjflfi flir@ctad
*1?” “§.’zu15-.b”a.*.f2?g1~’s”7’*’Q3.”r1i’\ :1??~§§=¢ –V’i’:a-:…..Vw}§i.«;:ecta=:1 1:9
hwlfi flue m@§§§ %¥§ui§§f%yDi§$fiimg nmtica to
thfl p$£m@fié #$§ $%#&Ei%§ai%§§ mnmpensatimn ta
fiafi amt ffi®ir’fi%QK§i%fiiiity an tha intareat

IECfiiW$fim If it ifi fmfimd that there 15 a tax

€;ia@ili%yFanxtha yéfiaan caneaxned, tha revenue

aBmfiifi “fi¢1léQfi} tha tax frwm the pazaan

2′ fl$hfiéflfiafi:~fi&& refund tha ammumt t0 the

‘*ff:éapmm&éntL Em 313$, ifi thara is ma tax

‘iiabiEi£y’ an aha pexamn mancernedg the T35

E Gfl;l§fltQd shaulfi be xafunfied ta the

A”&eapwmdamt¥ mt swurae with imtaxaat in eitha:

Cfflfififi

629/

.’i;§ [_T A’

with ‘thfi ahwm wbaerwatimna, the

33. 3 as}. lawsad .

figs”

Iudd9F ”

Sdjm
3uaqe