TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1674X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als, is a common issue involved i.e. validity of the orders u/s 154 of the Act for rectifying the mistake relating to levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act, when the said orders did not contain any directions in favour of charging of the said interest u/s 234A of the Act. 2. Referring to the above common issue raised in all these three appeals, ld. Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to an order of the Amritsar Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. M/s. Heritage Project vide ITA No.170/ASR/2016 for the assessment year 2009-10 dated 12.10.2017 and submitted that a similar issue came for adjudication by the said Tribunal and ruled that existence of a direction on the face of the assessment order is the requirement for the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exercising jurisdiction u/s 263 but by no means it can be done u/s 154. If no such order is there, the revenue cannot demand interest u/s 234A. 1.5. Refer: CIT vs. Ruchira Papers Ltd - Himachal Pradesh High Court - 212 Taxman 9 CIT vs. Deep Avadh Hotels P. Ltd - Allahabad High Court - 350 ITR 185 In view of above, it is submitted that these order passed u/s 154 be quashed and consequently demand raised may please be directed to be deleted. 2. Validity of jurisdiction assumed u/s 154: 2.1. Without prejudice to above submission, it is submitted that the issue involved in the present appeals is as to whether interest not charged in the original assessment order can be rectified or not u/s 154 is highly debatable which requires ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome is filed on 27.09.2011 i.e. before the due date as specified u/s 139(1). Needless to state it is a valid return. In spite of the fact that the said return has not been taken for scrutiny and no assessment is made u/s 143(3) nevertheless the said return by any standard cannot be regarded as non-est. It is very much a valid return. Notice u/s 148 was required to be issued to get the said return regularized for assessment to be completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147. Unless this procedure is followed Assessing Officer does not get jurisdiction to assess or reassess the income of the assessee for the relevant AY. 3.4. It is admitted that on receipt of notice issued u/s 148 the appellant has not written to the Assessing Officer to treat the or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed in response to notice u/s 148." 3. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied heavily on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). 4. We heard both the sides on this limited issue and perused the said order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Heritage Project (supra). Further, we also examined the assessment order, in general and the contents of para 11 to 13, in particular for want of direction, if any, in favour of charging of interest u/s 234A of the Act. We find that there is no whisper about the proposal to levy of interest u/s 234A of the Act in the assessment orders. Considering the same, we are of the opinion that the order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Heritage Project (supra) is applicable directly to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice. We further find that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Kishan Lal (HUF) has again followed the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court and has held that in the absence of any direction in the assessment order for charging interest u/s 234A and 234B interest cannot be recovered. For the sake of completeness, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) are reproduced below: ........... The Hon'ble Court has held that if there is no direction in the original assessment order, no rectification can be made as there is no mistake apparent from record. The case law relied on by Ld. DR is on a different aspect where the Hon'ble Court has said that omission of application of statutory provision is a mistake rectifiable u/s 154 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|