https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28903 The court held that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) did not waive penal interest for the assessment year 1963-64, despite its absence in the assessment order. The court emphasized that penal interest under Section 217 of the Income Tax Act must be levied when conditions are met, and the ITO did not provide justification for waiver. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, directing the assessee to pay costs and preserving the right to seek relief under Rule 40 for interest reduction or waiver. en-us Wed, 03 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:21:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28903 The court held that the Income Tax Officer (ITO) did not waive penal interest for the assessment year 1963-64, despite its absence in the assessment order. The court emphasized that penal interest under Section 217 of the Income Tax Act must be levied when conditions are met, and the ITO did not provide justification for waiver. The court ruled in favor of the Revenue, directing the assessee to pay costs and preserving the right to seek relief under Rule 40 for interest reduction or waiver. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28903