9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
The appeal u/s 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 filed by the Commissioner of Income-tax against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench-E regarding the assessment year 1992-93. Details of the Judgment: Issue 1: Application of Section 154 of the Income-tax Act The Assessing Officer passed an order u/s 154 holding that interest allowed to the assessee u/s 244A(1) was not permissible. The Tribunal held that section 154 did not apply to the case. The High Court analyzed the provisions of section 154 and emphasized that a mistake rectifiable u/s 154 must be apparent from the record, not dependent on argument or elaboration. The Court held that the mistake must be patent, obvious, and not subject to debate. It was concluded that the case did not involve a mistake apparent on the face of the record, thus section 154 was not applicable. Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 244A(1) of the Income-tax Act The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer erred in denying interest to the assessee on amounts paid u/s 140A. The Tribunal clarified that the chargeability of interest was a debatable question, falling beyond the scope of section 154. Reference was made to the Supreme Court's decision in T.S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Bros. [1971] 82 ITR 50, emphasizing that a decision on a debatable point of law is not a mistake apparent from the record. The Tribunal concluded that the Assessing Officer was incorrect in withdrawing the interest amount u/s 154, as the case fell beyond the purview of section 154. Conclusion: The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that section 154 had no application in the case. The Court highlighted that the applicability of section 154 depends on the facts of each case, and in this instance, the question regarding interest chargeability was debatable. As no question of law arose, the appeal was dismissed, and the provisions of section 260A of the Act were deemed inapplicable to the case.
|
