V M SALGAOCAR AND BRO P LTD Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
S. Bandyopadhyay, Accountant Member -
(1.) BOTH these appeals are directed against the orders passed by the CIT(A) dated 20-10-1986 and 10-7-1987 against the orders passed by the ITO under Section 154 for the same year, viz., 1977-78. Since the issue involved is the same, a common order is being passed for the sake of convenience.
(2.) The original assessment for this particular year was completed on 6-9-1980. Consequent on the order of the CIT(A) dated 21-9-1982, the ITO revised the assessment on 29-11-1982 which resulted in grant of refund and also interest Under Section 244(1A) of the Income-tax Act. However, the original assessment was reopened (most probably Under Section 147) and the ITO felt that on completion of the reassessment on 19-9-1984, interest allowed Under Section 244(1A) in his order dated 29-11-1982 should have been withdrawn. But this was not done at the time of making the re-assessment. As such, the ITO, after issuing a notice Under Section 154 dated 18-7-1985 and allowing the assessee-company an opportunity of being heard, passed the order Under Section 154 dated 10-12-1985, impugned in the first appeal before us. In the said order Under Section 154, he withdrew the Interest allowed Under Section 244(1A) to the extent of Rs. 2,82,958.
The ITO passed another order Under Section 154 dated 22-9-1986 in response to the application made by the assessee on 13-6-1986 regarding computation of the capital gains. In this second order Under Section 154, he withdrew the interest already allowed Under Section 244(1A) to the further extent of Rs. 99,642.
(3.) IN appeals against the above-mentioned orders Under Section 154, the CIT(A) considered the withdrawal of interest to be warranted and in that view, upheld the actions of the ITO and dismissed the appeals.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.