1979 (10) TMI 54 - HC - Income Tax

Court upholds Income Tax Officer's rectification of excess interest allowed to assessee under Section 154

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Delhi (Central) Versus Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Delhi (Central) Versus Raza Buland Sugar Company Limited - [1980] 123 ITR 185, 3 TAXMANN 283 Issues:1. Interpretation of Section 154 of the Income Tax Act regarding rectification of mistakes apparent from the record.2. Determination of the admissibility of interest under Section 214 of the Income Tax Act.3. Dispute over the correct date up to which interest is admissible under Section 214.4. Evaluation of the Tribunal's decision on the justification of invoking Section 154 by the Income Tax Officer.Detailed Analysis:1. The High Court was tasked with interpreting the application of Section 154 of the Income Tax Act in a case where the Income Tax Officer rectified an assessment order to withdraw excess interest allowed to the assessee. The Court examined whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the Officer was not justified in invoking Section 154 to rectify the mistake apparent from the record.2. The assessment for the respondent-assessee, a public limited company, was initially made in 1966, determining a total income of Rs. 6,11,778. Due to excess advance tax payments, the assessee was allowed interest under Section 214 amounting to Rs. 1,28,778. Subsequently, a rectification order was issued reducing the interest to Rs. 1,06,447. The Income Tax Officer, believing an excess allowance of interest, initiated proceedings under Section 154, resulting in the withdrawal of Rs. 22,281 as excess interest.3. A key point of contention was the date up to which interest under Section 214 is admissible - whether it is until the original assessment or the date of modification by the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal deliberated on this issue, ultimately deciding that the Officer's action under Section 154 was not justified. However, the High Court found that there was no controversy regarding the date of admissibility of interest in the present case, as the rectification was a consequential action due to an earlier mistake in allowing excess depreciation.4. Upon review, the High Court disagreed with the Tribunal's reasoning, emphasizing that the rectification made by the Income Tax Officer was a necessary consequence of the earlier error in calculating the interest admissible to the assessee. The Court concluded that there was no debatable or controversial question involved in the proceedings, thereby ruling in favor of the department and against the assessee. The department was awarded costs amounting to Rs. 200.