COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. TIWARY BECHAR AND COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this reference under S. 256(1) of the IT Act, the question referred to us for our opinion is :

(2.) THE question referred to us is concluded by two decisions of this Court in CIT vs. Ashok Trading Company (1986) 160 ITR 663 (Pat) and CIT vs. .W. N. Sen Gupta & Co. (1986) 160 ITR 670 (Pat).

(3.) IN the case of CIT vs. Ashok Trading Company (supra), the question referred to this Court was whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that interest liable to be charged under S. 139 had been waived by the IAC and that no order could be passed under S. 154 of the Act. In the case of CIT vs. V. M.N.Sen Gupta & Co. (supra), the same question fell for consideration. The question referred was whether the Tribunal was correct in presuming that the ITO had exercised his discretion in favour of the assessee by not charging interest under S. 139(2) of the Act at the time of completing the original assessment and in holding that the provisions of S. 154 were not applicable for rectifying the original order. The same question falls for consideration before us in the present reference as well. In our view, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of S. A. L. Narayan Row (supra) is no more the law of the land after the amendment of S. 139(8) and the enactment of r. 117A of the IT Rules.