9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (1) TMI 74X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever in controversy that ordinarily the assessee would be liable to pay interest on the assessed tax. No order was, however, passed by the Income-tax Officer. He did not at all advert to this aspect in his order. Subsequently, his attention was drawn to this slip. He, therefore, initiated proceedings for rectification under section 154 of the Act. Notice was issued to the assessee but no one appeared. In his absence, therefore, the Income-tax Officer by order dated November 2, 1973, rectified the assessment and assessed Rs. 3,675 as interest payable by the assessee. The assessee thereafter filed an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the assessment. In the matter of rectification and charging of interest, the Appellate As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act, there was an obligation to charge interest from the assessee for late filing of the return. Interest had not been charged in that case. Therefore, their Lordships of the Calcutta High Court laid down that the liability can only exonerated in terms of sub-section (8) of section 139 of the Act and that exercise of discretion must also be in accordance with rule 117A of the Rules. In that case, Sabyasachi Mukharji J. observed that there was no evidence that the Income-tax Officer had exercised discretion or applied his mind to the facts of the case. The same is the situation before us. It would, therefore, be difficult to hold that, there was waiver in regard to charging of interest. Assuming that there was an express order to that effe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evy of interest. The proviso to rule II 7A is rather important and it lays down that the previous approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner must be obtained for the purpose of waiving interest where the amount of interest reduced or waived under clause (iv) or (v) exceeds Rs. 1,000. In the instant case as well, the chargeable interest exceeds Rs. 1,000, the sum being Rs. 3,675. It is not in controversy that the approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had never been obtained for the waiver of interest. It is thus obvious that the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to waive the charging of interest. If the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to waive charging of interest, it cannot be held that the Income-tax Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
