Officers from Income Tax Department have seized some assets and money from Gul Ltd.'s premises. After one year of such seizure the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Department and the outstanding tax demands wer
CS Professional · Resolution of Corporate Disputes, Non-Compliances & Remedies · PYQS · December 2021
Officers from Income Tax Department have seized some assets and money from Gul Ltd.'s premises. After one year of such seizure the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Department and the outstanding tax demands were met out from the sale of assets. Gul Ltd. claims interest from the Income Tax Department for the assets and monies seized, as more than one year has elapsed from seizure. In background of provisions of Income-tax Act, is the claim of the Company justified?
Answer & Explanation:
According to Section 132B(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), the Central Government shall pay simple interest at the rate of one-half per cent for every month or part of a month on the amount by which the aggregate amount of money seized under section 132 of the Act or requisitioned under section 132A of the Act, as reduced by the amount of money, if any, released under the first proviso to clause (i) of sub-section (1), and of the proceeds, if any, of the assets sold towards the discharge of the existing liability referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (1), exceeds the aggregate of the amount required to meet the liabilities referred to in clause (i) of sub-section (1) of this section. Such interest shall run from the date immediately following the expiry of the period of one hundred and twenty days from the date on which the last of the authorisations for search under section 132 of the Act or requisition under section 132A of the Act was executed to the date of completion of the assessment under section 153A of the Act or under Chapter XIV-B. Hence, the claim of the Company is justified.
Topics: Income-tax Act, 1961
Related Questions in this Topic
- The Assessing Officer received a tip-off about certain transactions happening in a famous café named, The Friends Joint,...
- During the income-tax assessment of PR Ltd., the Assessing Officer suspected that the Company concealed incentive income...
- Differentiate between Punishment for False Statement and Punishment for False Evidence under the Companies Act, 2013.
- Mr. P who was a Managing Director of XYZ Ltd, was terminated from the position of Managing Director by virtue of an orde...
- Amit Sinha, commonly known as Sethji, has been accused of certain offenses under the SEBI Act, 1992. SEBI directed him t...