9911796707
TMI Blog1985 (11) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No regular appeals to have been filed against the above assessments. Subsequently, the assessee moved applications under s. 154 to the ITO contending that no interest under s. 139(8) could be charged according to law where the assessments were made under s. 147 in view of the definition of regular assessment as given in s. 2(40) of the IT Act to mean the assessments made under s. 143 or 144. The contention was that assessment made under s. 147 was not a regular assessment as defined under s. 2(40) the IT Act. It was further pointed out that under s. 139(8)(a) of the IT Act, interest could be charged only on the amount of tax payable on the total income as determined on regular assessment. As the assessments were made under s. 147 and not un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar assessment was accepted by him, 4. The revenue is in appeal against the above orders of the AAC. Referring to the judgment of the Punjab High Court in Smt. Kamlavati vs. CIT. He pointed out that their Lordships did not deal with the provisions of s. 139 (8) in the context of regular assessment but the decision was in relation to the proceedings under s. 273 of the IT Act. He further pointed out the Expln. 2 was substituted below s. 139 (8) by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984 where by it has been explained that an assessee made for the first time under s. 147 shall be regarded as a regular assessment for the purposes of sub-s. (8) of s. 139. He therefore, urged that the Explanation was clarificatory in nature and it stated the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of a particular High Court are bound by its excision even for the purpose of rectification under s. 154 and such a decision was binding and it could not be pleaded that it required a long drawn process of reasoning to discover the same. Their Lordships further observed that so long as the decision in Brij Bhushan Lal vs. CIT (1971) 81 ITR 497 (P H) stood, the IT authorities were bound to follow the rules laid down therein. Referring to the Expln. 2 below s. 139 (8), he contended that this Explanation was prospective inasmuch as it was made applicable w.e.f. 1st April 1985 by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1984. It, therefore, did not have retrospective effect. He further urged that if the was clarificatory right from the beginning, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se reported as Smt. kamlavait vs. CIT was squarely applicable to the the facts of the case and it was a mistake apparent from record in the ratio decidendi of the judgment of the Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Mohanlal Kansal (1978) 114 ITR 584 (P L). My above observations are, of course subject of consideration of Expln. 2 below s. 139 (8) as to whether the same is retrospective in nature. While I agree with the ld. Departmental Representative that an Explanation explains the position of law as it stood right from the beginning but it has further to be considered as to whether the legislature intended so to do. The above Explanation was brought on the statute book by s. 25 of the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act., ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
