WASHABARIE TEA CO (P) LTD Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
LAWS(CAL)-1996-7-72
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on July 23,1996

WASHABARIE TEA CO (P) LTD Appellant
VERSUS
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Respondents




JUDGEMENT

- (1.)These appeals are instituted by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) for the asst. yrs. 1987-88 and 1989-90. As both the appeals are heard together they are disposed of together for the sake of convenience.
(2.)ITA No. 4119/Cal/91 (asst. yr. 1987-88)
In this appeal the assessee has raised the ground that the CIT(A) erred in rejecting the claim of the assessee denying liability to pay interest under s. 215 on the ground that there is no mistake apparent from the record without assigning any valid reason.

(3.)Briefly 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 denied its liability of payment of any such interest under s. 215 and as per the Supreme Court decision in the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. vs . CIT, 1986 160 ITR 961 and other decisions appeal lies against such levy of interest under s. 215. The CIT(A) rejected the petition on the ground that he had already expressed his finding on that and, therefore, there is no mistake apparent from the record.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.