9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (3) TMI 98X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come ought to have been filed by 15th Aug., 73. In making the assessment the ITO did not however levy any interest under s. 139(8) for the belated filing of the return. The CIT looking into the file of the ITO held the above action of the ITO prejudicial to the Revenue and started proceedings under s. 263 of the IT Act. It was claimed before the Commissioner that charging or not charging of intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee has urged before us also that the ITO consciously waived the interest even as he consciously did not start penalty proceedings. The delay in filing the return was on account of the fact that the books etc. had to be verified and the final statements were to be prepared. An application in form No. 6 was filed giving the above reason and asking for time to file the return. The ITO grante ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t be leviable, his order is clearly prejudicial to the Revenue and the Commissioner has correctly exercised his jurisdiction in the matter. The learned counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the Commissioner has directed the ITO to charge interest under s. 139(8) and this order of his virtually amounted to depriving the ITO even if he has not exercised his power of waiving the interest unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
