9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (1) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest in varying amounts for the different years either u/ss 215 and 139(8) or u/ss 217 and 139(8)of the IT Act, 1961, as the case may be, but no such interest was charged while making the amendments u/s 155 on 9th November 1979. The omission to charge interest under the orders passed u/s 155, was corrected by the ITO by having resorted to the provisions of s 154. This is how, in the case of all the assesses, the ITO passed orders u/s 154 for the relevant years. Before the AAC, it was pleaded on behalf of the assesses that no interest having been charged under the orders passed u/s 155, the interest would be deemed to have been waived by the ITO under s. 215 or 217 or 139(8) and, therefore, he was not right in resorting to s. 154. Anothe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... waiver could be deemed from the fact that no order was passed to charge interest in the orders passed u/s 155. Then, it is submitted by Shri Choudhury that the scope of s. 155 is quite different and no waiver can be done thereunder. The ITO already exercised jurisdiction to changing interest at the stage of original assessment and that jurisdiction could not have been abdicated while passing the orders u/s 155, says Shri Choudhury. The argument is that under the orders passed u/s 155, the ITO was supposed only to amend the earlier orders conforming to the order of the firm and that no jurisdiction was vested in the ITO to waive interest, which had already been charged, by means of orders passed u/s 155. The submission is that ITO was of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n all the conditions as prescribed by r.40, were fulfilled by the assessee. On the issue of waiver, we do not agree with Sh. Ranka that any debate is possible on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. There being no order on the point of waiver, the ITO having already charged interest at the stage of the original assessments and the scope of s. 155 being a limited one, we agree with the revenue that there was no waiver of interest when the orders u/s 155 were passed. The view taken by the ITO. In this regard, is quite correct. 4. Then, it was argued by Shri Ranka that in the cases relating to the asst.yr.1974-75 of Shri Surendra Kumar, Shri Vinay Chand and Shri Rajendra Kumar and in the case relating to asst. yr.1975-76 of Shri G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... H. Raj Kuverba Dowager Maharani Saheb of Gondal, that the proceeding u/s 215 or 217 are quasi-judicial. It has, therefore, to be held that an order u/s 215 or 217 has to be passed. Whether or not the demand notice and the ITNS 150 form part of the assessment order, this is a highly debatable question and, thus, it is beyond the purview of s 154. The assessee are entitled to take up this argument as it goes to the root of the matter. Shri Ranka has shown us the relevant assessment orders, which do not contain any direction for changing interest. We, therefore, accept the argument of Shri Ranka that for the asst. yr.1974-75 in the case of Shri Surendra Kumar, Shri Vinay Chand and Shri Rajendra Kumar and for the asst.yr.1975-76 in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
