9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (6) TMI 49X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompleted on 18th March, 1976. The assessment order did not contain any reference to the levy of any interest u/s 217(1A). Subsequently, a rectification order was passed by the ITO u/s 154. The date of passing this order is a matter of controversy. Among other things, by this order, the ITO levied interest u/s 217(1A). 2. In appeal, the levy of interest was sustained by the Commissioner (A). He d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 18th March, 1976. As such, a rectification order could have been passed only on or before 18th March, 1980 in view of the period of limitation prescribed by sub-s. (7) of s.154. The copy of the rectification order does not carry any date. According to the assessee, the demand for payment of the interest as per the rectification order was received by the assessee only on 23rd February 1981. The ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... part of the order of the assessment as the same has to be made after the regular assessment is completed. Such an order could be passed separately and subsequently. It was, therefore, contended that an order levying interest u/s 217 cannot, for the first time, be passed by a rectification order when the original order is silent on the matter. In support of the position, the ld. representative for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no order could be passed u/s 263 with regard to a matter which did not form part of the assessment order and which could have formed part of a separate order. The ratio of the decision of the Karnataka High Court and that of the Tribunal fully apply to the facts of the present case. It could not be said that the failure to pass an order u/s 217 while completing the assessment was an error apparent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
