https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28646 Mere omission by an Income-tax Officer to levy penal interest under section 217(1A) does not amount to waiver of interest. Waiver under rule 40 of the Income-tax Rules requires a conscious and overt exercise of discretion based on special circumstances; inadvertent non-action is insufficient. On that basis, non-levy of interest can be treated as an error prejudicial to the Revenue and revised under section 263, enabling the Commissioner to direct reconsideration of levy in accordance with law. en-us Wed, 03 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Feb 2010 15:22:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28646 Mere omission by an Income-tax Officer to levy penal interest under section 217(1A) does not amount to waiver of interest. Waiver under rule 40 of the Income-tax Rules requires a conscious and overt exercise of discretion based on special circumstances; inadvertent non-action is insufficient. On that basis, non-levy of interest can be treated as an error prejudicial to the Revenue and revised under section 263, enabling the Commissioner to direct reconsideration of levy in accordance with law. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28646