TMI Blog2003 (7) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pply to the case of the respondent – Held that revision can be considered as a revision petition pending to attract the application of the KVSS, 1998, in terms of section 95(i)(c) thereof. - - - - - Dated:- 24-7-2003 - Judge(s) : K. A. ABDUL GAFOOR., J. M. JAMES. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by K.A. ABDUL GAFOOR J. - The question agitated in this appeal at the instance of the Revenue is whether exhibit P3 declaration filed by the respondent can be one which could be considered in terms of the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998. It is contended by the Revenue that, to consider a declaration applying the Scheme, there shall be some proceedings pending before the concerned authority, and such proceedings shall be in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent challenged it contending that exhibit P2 was a valid revision petition, as in exhibit P2, he had claimed appropriate reliefs including that relating to the alleged wrong calculation of interest contained in the assessment order. Section 264 of the Income-tax Act enables an assessee to file revision petition before the Commissioner against any order passed by the subordinate authority. So, the respondent could have filed a revision under section 264 of the Income-tax Act, alleging wrong calculation of interest as well. Therefore, exhibit P2 was a valid revision petition. It ought to have been kept in abeyance until an order has been passed on exhibit P3 declaration. Hence, the respondent submits that exhibits P3, P6 and P7 are b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per the assessment order is Rs. 5,32,341 out of which interest under section 234A is Rs. 1,75,642 and under section 234B is Rs. 1,95,526. The interest levied is exorbitant and I am unable to pay the same. The interest calculation is also not correct in law and I may request that suitable relief may be granted by either cancelling the interest or reducing the same." The grievance voiced in exhibit P2 by the respondent is that "the interest levied is exorbitant and I am unable to pay the same. The interest calculation is also not correct in law". The prayer in the revision was that "suitable relief may be granted by either cancelling the interest or reducing the same." This prayer in the light of the grievance included complaint about the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... piry of that period. (4) The Commissioner shall not revise any order under this section in the following cases- (a) where an appeal against the order lies to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Appellate Tribunal but has not been made and the time within which such appeal may be made has not expired, or, in the case of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Appellate Tribunal, the assessee has not waived his right of appeal; or (b) where the order is pending on an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals); or (c) where the order has been made the subject of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) or to the Appellate Tribunal. (5) Every application by an assessee for revis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... waiver of interest as per the assessment order is within the domain of the Chief Commissioner, it cannot be said that the correction with respect to the calculation of the interest complained of in exhibit P2 is not within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner before whom exhibit P2 had been filed. In terms of section 264 extracted above, the Commissioner can necessarily consider the grievances regarding the error in calculation of interest contained in an order passed by his subordinate authority. Therefore, to that extent, exhibit P2 revision under section 264 filed before the Commissioner was maintainable. That aspect has never been considered either in exhibit P5 or in exhibit P6 by the Commissioner. Hence, the view of the Commissioner t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P3" when exhibit P2 was so pending. Therefore, exhibit P7 also is illegal. While coming to the aforesaid conclusion, we had in our mind the contention urged by counsel for the Revenue at the time of hearing that even if exhibit P2 can be taken as a revision petition to the extent of calculation of interest, a subject-matter of this revision also shall be to the extent of interest alone. We need not detain ourselves to consider this aspect as the learned single judge has remitted the entire matter to the authority concerned, who will be free to consider all aspects, in accordance with law. Accordingly, there is no reason for interference with the judgment appealed against. The writ appeals are hence dismissed. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
