9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 906 - HC - Income TaxLevy of interest u/s 217(1A) - Interest payable by assessee when no estimate made. - Whether the Tribunal was correct in deleting the interest levied by the AO u/s 217(1A) Held that - At the time of original assessment u/s 143(3), the AO had directed charging of interest u/s 201 and 217 - The computation form also referred to and computed interest u/s 217 - the AO had the right to reconsider the question of levy of interest u/s 217 and also examine and state under which sub-section interest was leviable - Right to correct and modify the assessment order was granted and allowed by the first appellate authority vide order dated 24th July, 1992 - Section 217(1) and (1A) both use the expression on the making of the assessment - the interest could be imposed after income of an assessee stands computed pursuant to the assessment - The interest component had to be calculated in the computation form - The computation form was/is not the assessment order, but quantifies the tax demand/tax payable, interest payable under different sections by the assessee or in case of refund, refund and interest payable by the Revenue - relying upon Kalyankumar Ray vs. CIT 1991 (8) TMI 291 - SUPREME COURT - the assessment order dated 22nd March, 1991, had specifically directed levy of interest u/s 217 of the Act and did not specify the sub-section under which the interest should be charged - The direction to specify the sub-section could be read in the order dated 24th July, 1992, when it was directed by the CIT(A) that the AO should pass a speaking order. The order u/s 217 did not form part of the assessment order and it could be made after the regular assessment was made - mere omission on the part of the AO to impose or refer to Section 217 cannot lead to the inference that the AO had waived interest payable without giving reasons for doing so - it follows that the AO did not become functus officio after order of regular assessment was passed and it was permissible and permitted that he could pass an order u/s 217 after he had made regular assessment the Commissioner was not justified in invoking Section 263 because the AO had failed to mention and state that interest u/s 217 should be levied while passing the regular assessment order - an order u/s 217 should be passed after regular assessment has been made Decided in favour of Revenue.
Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of interest levied under Section 217(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Treatment of tax paid on 17th August 1987 as advance tax for the assessment year 1988-89. 3. Filing and acknowledgment of Form No. 29 for the assessment year 1988-89. 4. Authority and jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to impose interest under Section 217(1A). 5. Interpretation of Tribunal's observations and directions regarding interest levy. 6. Legal implications of assessment orders and computation forms. 7. The role of appellate authorities and the finality of their directions. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Deletion of interest levied under Section 217(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961: The primary issue was whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) was correct in deleting the interest of Rs. 45,92,475/- levied by the Assessing Officer under Section 217(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal had previously directed the deletion of interest under Section 217(1)(b) because the assessee had filed an estimate of advance tax. However, the Tribunal allowed the Assessing Officer to examine the question of levy of interest under other provisions of Section 217. The Assessing Officer subsequently imposed interest under Section 217(1A), which was affirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Tribunal's deletion of this interest was challenged by the Revenue, leading to the High Court's involvement. 2. Treatment of tax paid on 17th August 1987 as advance tax for the assessment year 1988-89: The assessee contended that the tax paid on 17th August 1987 should be treated as advance tax for the assessment year 1988-89. The Assessing Officer rejected this contention, noting that the taxes were paid for the assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) agreed with the Assessing Officer, stating that no credit for tax paid in earlier years could be given for the assessment year 1988-89. The Tribunal's decision to delete the interest levied under Section 217(1A) did not address this specific issue directly but was part of the broader context of the case. 3. Filing and acknowledgment of Form No. 29 for the assessment year 1988-89: The assessee argued before the Tribunal that it had filed Form No. 29, showing NIL income, for the assessment year 1988-89. The Tribunal verified and found the receipt of the form to be genuine, leading to the deletion of interest under Section 217(1)(b). However, the Tribunal allowed the Assessing Officer to examine the levy of interest under other provisions of Section 217. The High Court noted that the Tribunal's observation did not bar the Assessing Officer from imposing interest under Section 217(1A). 4. Authority and jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to impose interest under Section 217(1A): The High Court emphasized that the Assessing Officer had the authority to impose interest under Section 217(1A) based on the Tribunal's earlier order, which allowed the examination of interest levy under other provisions of Section 217. The High Court rejected the argument that the original assessment order was defective due to the lack of specification of the sub-section under Section 217. The High Court noted that the direction given by the first appellate authority to pass a speaking order on levy of interest under Section 217 had attained finality. 5. Interpretation of Tribunal's observations and directions regarding interest levy: The High Court clarified that the Tribunal's observation in its order dated 16th August 1996 was not a binding direction but allowed the Assessing Officer to consider the levy of interest under other provisions of Section 217. The High Court noted that the Tribunal's observation did not prohibit the Assessing Officer from imposing interest under Section 217(1A) and that the Assessing Officer had acted within his authority. 6. Legal implications of assessment orders and computation forms: The High Court discussed the legal implications of assessment orders and computation forms, citing the Supreme Court's judgment in Kalyankumar Ray vs. CIT. The High Court noted that the assessment order determines and quantifies the income, while the computation form quantifies the tax demand and interest payable. The High Court emphasized that the assessment order dated 22nd March 1991 had directed the levy of interest under Section 217, and the specific sub-section was mentioned in subsequent orders. 7. The role of appellate authorities and the finality of their directions: The High Court highlighted the role of appellate authorities and the finality of their directions. The High Court noted that the first appellate authority's direction to pass a speaking order on levy of interest under Section 217 had attained finality. The High Court rejected the assessee's contention that the original assessment order was defective and emphasized that the appellate authority had granted the Assessing Officer the right to reconsider the levy of interest under Section 217. Conclusion: The High Court concluded that the Tribunal's deletion of interest levied under Section 217(1A) was incorrect. The High Court held that the Assessing Officer had the authority to impose interest under Section 217(1A) and that the Tribunal's observation did not bar the Assessing Officer from doing so. The High Court answered the question of law in favor of the Revenue and against the respondent assessee, thereby allowing the appeal filed by the Revenue.
|
