TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 234B and 234C except to the extent of granting relief under the Circulars issued by the Board under section 119. This being so, there would be no requirement for AO to levy the same specifically in the assessment order. For the same reason, another plea of Ld. AR that debatable issue could not be subject matter of rectification u/s 154, would have no legs to stand. As in the present case, interest was levied in the original Income Tax Computation Form, the quantum of which was rectified u/s 154 which could certainly be done. The case law of Hon ble Delhi High Court in CIT V/s Inchcape India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2002 (8) TMI 862 - DELHI HIGH COURT] is also on the same fact and hence, not applicable. - Decided against assessee. - ITA No. 2272/C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that such a levy could not be made u/s 154. The Ld. AR also submitted that without specific direction, such a levy could not be made. The Ld. AR filed written submissions also. The Ld. Sr. DR, on the other hand submitted that no new interest was levied u/s 154 and only the quantum was rectified. Having heard rival submissions and upon perusal of case records, our adjudication would be as under. 3.1 The assessee was assessed u/s. 143 (3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 30.03.2016 wherein the returned income of Rs.1.70 Lacs was determined at Rs.9.76 Lacs. In the income tax computation form dated 30.03.2016, interest u/s. 234A was charged for Rs.2430/-. However, the demand was rectified and order u/s. 154 of the Act was passed on 18.07.2018 where ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest u/s 234A of the Act and 234C can be levied only on the tax payable as per the returned income and not on the tax payable on the assessed income. In that case the assessment order did not mention the levy of interest and demand notice did not mention as to under which provision of the Act the interest has been levied. 4.3. In the case of appellant, the re-assessment order clearly mention the delay in filing of return and the demand notice also clearly mention that the interest of Rs.1,23,944/- had been levied u/s 234A of the Act. The facts and the circumstances of the case of the appellant are clearly different from the facts in case of Ranchi Club Ltd which Hon'ble Patna High court was dealing with, which were subsequent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessing officer is confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. Our findings and Adjudication 4. We find that Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V/s Anjum M.H.Ghaswala (119 Taxman 352; 18.10.2001) has held that a perusal of Sections 234A, 234B and 234C would show that the interest for default in furnishing return of income, default in payment of advance-tax and interest for deferment of advance-tax are mandatory in nature and therefore, Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) was not empowered to reduce or waive interest statutorily payable under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C except to the extent of granting relief under the Circulars issued by the Board under section 119. This being so, there wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
