9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (12) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ific order for charging interest under s. 217 (1A) either in the assessment order or separately. Without so doing he would not be entitled to charge the said interest through the demand notice. He, therefore, directed that the levy of interest be withdrawn. The Revenue has come up in second appeal before us. 2. We have heard the representatives of the parties at length in this appeal. On behalf of the Department it was urged that interest under s. 217 (1A) was mandatory and since the assessee had failed to file an estimate or advance tax under sub-cl. (iv) of s. 209 (a) or sub-s. (3A) of s. 212, therefore, interest had to be levied. The mere absence of the mention for the levy of interest in the assessment order did not exonerate the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lid. Moreover, interest under s. 217 could not be levied on assessment of reassessment under s. 147. Sub-ss. (1) and (2) of s. 139 could have no application to the facts and circumstances of this case as there was no application for extension or time and there was no extension in fact. Sub-s. (1) had no application in the facts and circumstances of the case because no return had been filed by the petitioner within four years from the date within the meaning of the said sub-section, Hence, the levy of penal interest under s. 139 was without any authority of law. The order levying penal interest under ss. 139 and 217 was liable to be quashed. On the basis of this decision it was argued that no interest could be claimed by the ITO. 4. Next ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the rates in force in the financial year. If the amount of capital gains is deducted from the income for the purpose of computation of advance tax under s. 209, the assessee would not be liable to any interest under s. 217 (1A) at all. Moreover, the total amount of shortfall in the payment of tax even including tax on capital gain calculated by the ITO in his demand notice was only Rs. 6156 Now this order of the ITO was the subject matter of appeal before the CIT (A) on merits and the CIT (A) has already directed the ITO to verify the amount and allow the claim of the assessee on the basis of percentage prescribed for relief under s. 80M on dividends. He has also held that half of the establishment expenses should be attributed to the earn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
