9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (8) TMI 190X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e IAC (Assessment). 2. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that indentical issue had been before the Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 1981-82 and he made available a copy of the said order in ITA No. 1330/Del/85 dated 25-9-1987. He submitted at length that though the issue is covered against the Revenue as per said order he would not be satisfied unless he substantiates de novo the assessee's claim both on facts and in law. He submitted that the levy of interest u/s. 216 is not mandatory or automatic without applying his mind the ITO has arbitrarily in his handwriting written "charge interest u/s 216", along with other sections viz. 215 217. He cited Hindusthan Sanitary Ware Industries Ltd. v. CIT [1978] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hen these two facts are perused on one hand and section 216 along with 209 are perused carefully on the other hand it can easily be said that the assessee was not obliged to file the estimate of income which it had filed on 15-12-1981 in a sum of Rs. twenty-nine lakhs. Similar identical issue had been before the Tribunal in assessee's own case, wherein the charge of interest u/s. 216 came to be cancelled by the Tribunal vide its order dated 24th October 1986 in ITA No. 1330/Del/86. There as well the ITO had not dealt with the issue regarding charge of interest with any reasoning. He elected only to mention charge interest u/s. 216. Similar is the position here. Section 209-A clearly indicates on the particular facts of this case that the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... levy interest under section 216. Since the finding rests on the Income-tax Officer's appreciation of the facts, the reasons supporting his conclusions should be recorded in the assessment order itself so that an appellate authority can judge whether the Income-tax Officer's finding is justified on the facts of the case." Besides Their Lordships of Calcutta High Court in case of Hindusthan Sanitary Ware Industries Ltd., where the ITO had not applied his mind to the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal had restored back this matter for fresh consideration by the ITO. Their Lordships held that the Tribunal was not justified even in sending back the matter to the ITO for fresh decision instead of annulling the same. Similar is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
