TMI Blog1982 (9) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessed by the ITO on 30th September, 1966, at a total income of Rs. 1,64,394 as against the declared loss of Rs. 1,52,420 as per the original return dated 1st January, 1964, and a declared loss of Rs. 2,79,534 as per the revised return dated 11th July, 1966. On appeal, the AAC allowed the assessee certain reliefs to the total extent of Rs. 2,97,439 as regards the assessable income, vide his order dated 28th December, 1968. Thus, the income of the assessee as determined by the ITO at Rs. 1,64,394 got converted into a loss of Rs. 1,33,045. In addition, the assessee was also held entitled to certain further development rebate. As a result of the AAC's order dated 28th December, 1968, the assessee moved the ITO under s. 154 of the I.T. Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in holding that on reduction or deletion of the assessable income in appeal, the Income-tax Officer had no power to refuse relief regarding the payment of interest by Government under section 214(1), Income-tax Act ? (2) There being no provision for appeal against order under section 214(1), was the Tribunal right in sustaining the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order passed in appeal against an Order made on an application under section 154 after holding that no amendment as such was involved ? " On question No. 1, which involves a very interesting question of law, lengthy arguments were advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. Mr. D. N. Awasthy, learned counsel for the Revenue, had contended that the assessee is not entit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erved at the outset that certain decisions which have direct bearing and decided exactly a similar question in favour of the Revenue, were not cited before us at the time of arguments. The first case is of the Kerala High Court in N. Devaki Amma v. ITO [1980] 122 ITR 272 (Ker), and the second case is of the Delhi High Court in National Agricultural Co-operative Marketing Federation of India Ltd. v. Union of India [1981] 130 ITR 928 (Delhi). We have given careful thought to all the aspects raised before us in the light of the judicial pronouncements on the point in issue and we find that there is a conflict of opinion between the various High Courts. The Calcutta and Madras High Courts have taken a view favourable to the assessee, while th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ermined to be payable at the regular assessment. It would, therefore, be apparent that the provisions of s. 214 of the Act will not entitle the assessee to get interest on an amount of Rs. 18,880, which amount became returnable in view of the reduction of tax in quantum appeal." It may again be observed that even the aforesaid judgment was not cited before us. However, in view of the binding precedent in Rohtak Delhi Transport P. Ltd.'s case [1981] 130 ITR 777 (P H), the answer to the question has to be returned in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. But on some occasion an argument may arise that in the aforesaid case the matter was decided ex parte, i.e., in the absence of the assessee and has not been dealt with in depth, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
