TMI Blog1955 (1) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ple reasons to form the opinion that the purchase prices of groundnuts claimed by the assessee were, to some extent, inflated. For these reasons, the Income-tax authorities rejected the books and applying the proviso to section 13 made an addition of ₹ 3,634 to the assessment on the basis of a reasonable gross profit. The Tribunal confirmed the addition as it found it was far less than what it should be if 72 per cent kernel production from groundnuts being the average production percentage for the whole province of Madras as endorsed by the Government Marketing Report was adopted as a more proper and scientific basis for adjustment of the assessment. This decision of the Tribunal is based purely on a question of fact and cannot consequently give rise to any question of law. 3. Question (1) in the present application is as follows : Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case there was any scope for the application of proviso to section 13 of the Act and for the rejection of the book results ? Though the application of the proviso has not been specifically pleaded in the grounds of appeal before the Tribunal still the various grounds on which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application was sought to be referred. But, in our view, the only preliminary issue whether an appeal under section 18A(6) lay to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was decided throughout. Therefore, the question whether the penal interest mentioned was properly levied and computed was not decided and indeed no material has been placed to decide that question. Hence, the only question to be referred for the opinion of the High Court is : Whether an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the levy of penal interest under the provisions of section 18A(6) is competent. K. Srinivasan and M. J. Swami, for the assessee. D. Narasaraju and M. Kondala Rao, for the Commissioner. JUDGMENT SUBBA RAO, C.J.― The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Madras Bench, referred for the opinion of this Court the following question: Whether an appeal to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner against the levy of penal interest under the provisions of section 18A(6) is competent? The facts are in small compass and they are : The assessee carried on business in the manufacture and sale of groundnut oil and cake. In making the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble by him on the basis of such assessment. Section 29: When any tax, penalty or interest is due in consequence of any order passed under or in pursuance of this Act, the Income-tax Officer shall serve upon the assessee or other person liable to pay such tax, penalty or interests, a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum so payable. Section 30: Any assessee objecting to the amount of income assessed under section 23 or section 27 or the amount of loss computed under section 24 or the amount of tax determined under section 23 or section 27 or denying his liability to be assessed under this Act, or objecting to the cancellation by an Income-tax Officer of the registration of a firm under sub-section (4) of section 23 or to a refusal to register a firm under sub-section (4) of section 23 or section 26A or to make a fresh assessment under section 27..........or objecting to any order under sub-section (2) of section 44E or sub-section (5) of section 44F or sub-section (1) of section 46, or objecting to a refusal of an Income-tax Officer to allow a claim to a refund under section 48, 49 or 49F or to the amount of the refund allowed by the Income-tax Office ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d under section 23. As the order imposing penal interest is not an order assessing the income under section 23, it follows that no appeal lies under section 30. It is then contended that, if an appeal does not lie against an order imposing penal interest, it would cause irreparable hardship to an assessee. When the provisions of the statute are clear and unambiguous, there is no scope for invoking equitable doctrines. Section 30 does not either expressly or by necessary implication confer a right of appeal on the assessee against an order under section 18A(6) and we cannot add any words to that section, which are not there. We are also satisfied from the scheme of the provisions of section 18A that there cannot be any prejudice to the assessee. The provisions of section 18A (1), (2), (3) and (6) may be summarised thus: The section deals with what is popularly called the advance payment of income-tax in the case of income in respect whereof no deduction is made at the source. It applies only to an assessee whose total income is over the full taxable income by ₹ 2,500. In the case of an old assessee, the Income-tax Officer takes the initiative on the basis of the assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
