TMI Blog1987 (1) TMI 71X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that interest cannot be charged under section 139 by taking recourse to section 154 ? " The question referred to us is concluded by two decisions of this court in CIT v. Ashok Trading Company [1986] 160 ITR 663 and CIT v. .W. N. Sen Gupta and Co. [1986] 160 ITR 670. Some facts in brief must be set out to show the similarit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. Having initiated the proceeding, the Income-tax Officer rectified the order by charging interest on the assessed sum. The assessee filed an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside the order of the Income-tax Officer on the footing that the Income-tax Officer who had made the assessment must be deemed to have waived the charging of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion fell for consideration. The question referred was whether the Tribunal was correct in presuming that the Income-tax Officer had exercised his discretion in favour of the assessee by not charging interest under section 139(2) of the Act at the time of completing the original assessment and in holding that the provisions of section 154 were not applicable for rectifying the original order. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wn that where the amount of interest exceeds Rs. 1,000, reduction or waiver can be ordered only with the previous approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner. In this case, it is nobody's case that the approval of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner had been obtained. In that view of the matter, waiver cannot be implied. Without approval, the Incometax Officer had no jurisdiction to waive. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
