9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (6) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law, to the Hon'ble Hugh Court of Gujarat: 1. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deciding the validity of levy of interest under s. 215 of the IT Act, 1961 in an appeal against an order refusing l to exercise the powers under s.1 54 of the IT Act, 1961?" 2. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 16th June, 1978, Rs. 1,63,330 on 14th Nov., 1978 and Rs. 1,63,330 on 11th Jan., 1979, aggregating to Rs. 4,89,990. As the last installment was not paid on the stipulated date, the ITO while completing the original assessment charged interest amounting to Rs. 18,584 under s. 215 of the Act, but not treating Rs. 1,63,330 as advance tax. The assessee applied under s. 154 for deletion of the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld be filed against the levy of interest under s. 215. 2.3. The Tribunal, on appeal, by the assessee, allowed the appeal of the assessee on basis of s. 154 vide paras 9 & 10 of the order. It gave finding regarding advance tax in para 6.1. Is also held that provisions of Indian Contract Act applied as payment was made on advance tax challan in para 6.3. The Tribunal allowed the appeal after consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decline to make reference for the reasons as follows: 4.1. In respect of question No. 1, in our opinion, the same does not arise out of the order of the Tribunal. In paras 6 & 10, it is clearly held that the validity of levy of interest under s. 215 is not dealt with. 4 2. In respect of the second question, it is held in para 6.1 of the order that the ITS himself has treated all the three paym ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
