9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (8) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions of law for the decision of this court : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and also in view of the statutory provisions contained in rule 27E of the Regulation framed under the Electricity (Supply) Act, the Tribunal was right in law and fact in holding that there was no infraction of law a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ond appeal, the Appellate Tribunal, in paragraph 7.2 of its order dated February 19, 1985, held that the payment of interest of Rs. 18,081 cannot be said to be by way of penalty for violation of the law, and so the assessee is entitled to deduction of the said amount. The addition of the amount was directed to be deleted. It is thereafter at the instance of the Revenue that the two questions of la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est was payable and paid has not been adverted to by the Appellate Tribunal. Statutory regulations have been framed imposing conditions for supply of electric energy by the Kerala State Electricity Board as per B. C. No. TRII. 30634/70 dated August 16, 1972. Clause 27(e) is relevant in this context and it reads as follows : "If the bills are not paid on or before the due date, penalty will be lev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7 (CIT v. Travancore Cochin Chemicals Ltd. [1991] 189 ITR 314 (Ker) ) wherein we held that the exact statutory provision under which the interest was payable and was paid was not noticed by the Appellate Tribunal. We also emphasised the point that it was for the Appellate Tribunal to consider whether the payment of interest was for infraction of any law, The decision of this court in CIT v. T. M. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
