9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question of law for consideration by this court – However appeal is admitted for consideration of the following question of law: "Whether in the absence of any direction in the assessment order for levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C, the Assessing Officer could charge such interest while computing the tax liability?" - - - - - Dated:- 27-7-2004 - Judge(s) : N. K. SUD., ADARSH KUMAR GOEL JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench, "SMC-II", New Delhi (for short "the Tribunal"), dated December 17, 2003, for the assessment year 1997-98. Mr. P.C. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant, firstly challenged the finding of the Tribunal that the incent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P H) does not apply. We are not inclined to accept this contention. At page 691 of this report, their Lordships have observed as under: "The first question which needs to be decided is whether incentive bonus was assessable as profits and gains of business or profession. There is no dispute about the fact that the Development Officers are whole-time employees of the Life Insurance Corporation of India. They are employed for promoting and developing life insurance business. Their primary concern and functions are to secure more business for the Life Insurance Corporation of India. It cannot, therefore, be said that while working in the field they are doing work in a different capacity. They go to the field through the insurance agents. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceived by the Development Officers from the Life Insurance Corporation of India is by way of salary and has to be assessed under the same head. It is also clear that this finding is not based on the interpretation of the scheme alone. Since the matter is fully covered by the judgment of this court, we are satisfied that the issue raised by the assessee does not give rise to any referable question of law for consideration by this court. Learned counsel then contended that the Tribunal was not justified in upholding the levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C of the Act without appreciating the grounds raised before it. His contention is that there was no direction in the assessment order for levy of such interest and, accordingly, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
