TMI Blog1996 (7) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fly stated, the facts of this case are that in the assessment order the AO ordered "charge interest if any". In the demand notice the demand for interest under s. 215 of the Act was raised and served on the assessee. The assessee filed the appeal before the CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee denies its liability for payment of any such interest and hence the impugned assessment order is erroneous. While deciding the ground regarding charging of interest under s. 215 the CIT(A) held that this is consequential and is not appealable. The assessee then filed a petition under s. 154 dt. 24th June, 1991 and in para 6 thereof explained that the order of the CIT(A) is erroneous in law due to mistake apparent from the record as the assessee deni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n order to support his contention the learned counsel for the assessee also relied on the following decisions: (i) CIT vs. Karam Chand Thapar Ors. (P) Ltd. (1979) 119 ITR 751 (Cal); (ii) CIT vs. Virmani Refrigeration Storage (P) Ltd. (1991) 188 ITR 450 (All); and (iii) CIT vs. New Swadeshi Cotton Mills of Ahmedabad Ltd. (1984) 39 CTR (Cal) 220 : (1984) 147 ITR 163 (Cal). According to learned Departmental Representative there is no mistake apparent from record. 5. We have carefully considered the rival contentions, the relevant facts and decisions on which reliance is placed by the learned counsel for the assessee. We find that the order of the CIT(A) passed under s. 154 is bad in law as he has completely ignored the legal pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ke apparent from the record in the order of the CIT(A), insofar as the charging of interest under s. 215 is concerned it is appealable as the assessee has completely denied the liability. In this view of the matter we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file with the direction to decide the issue afresh on merit after admitting this ground as appealable and after granting an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. Accordingly the appeal is treated to have been allowed for statistical purposes. 7. ITA No. 4120/Cal/91 (asst. yr. 1989-90) The first ground of appeal is that the CIT(A) erred in not considering at all the submissions made in para 1 of the petition dt. 17th July, 1991, filed by the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ircumstances of the case and after hearing both the parties we come to the conclusion that the CIT(A) has completely failed in deciding the first ground of appeal raised before him by the assessee and it was not proper on his part to dispose of the same by mentioning that the first ground of appeal is general in nature and does not require any adjudication. In our opinion it is not general in nature and it requires adjudication and, therefore, the order of the CIT(A) on this point is set aside and the issue is restored to his file for deciding the same afresh after considering the written submission made by the assessee and after hearing both the parties. 11. Ground No. 2 relates to the confirmation of disallowance of staff welfare expen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lied on Para 5 of the order of the CIT(A) and supported the case of the Department. 14. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and have perused the material placed on the record. We find that the observation of the AO that the expenses are not properly vouched is not supported by the evidence and the contention of the assessee is proved to be correct on the basis of the order-sheet entries that the vouchers were never called for and verified. It is also noticed that the disallowance is estimated as in the case of repairs to machinery and building which is also not fair and reasonable. In this view of the matter we find that the order of the CIT(A) restricting the disallowance to Rs. 25,000 cannot be sustained in law. The disa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nly erroneous but self-contradictory and that the AO has not applied his mind and was suffering from a gross misconception about the facts and circumstances of the case. The representative of the assessee further submitted that no such explanation was called for by the AO and this fact is apparent from the record and, therefore, the allegation of the AO about the failure of the assessee to offer any satisfactory explanation is completely baseless and false. About the observation of the AO regarding reduction in most of the major items debited to the P L a/c he pointed out that they are factually misconceived and wholly incorrect and are contrary to the facts. The learned counsel for the assessee also pointed out that the comparative analysi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
