TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1986 (8) TMI 125
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under section 154 by the ITO, demand notice was issued to the assessee on9-12-1982. In the computation given on the fact of this demand notice, it was indicated that interest was being charged from the assessee in terms of section 139 of the Act, amounting to Rs. 32,639 and in terms of section 216 of the Act, amounting to Rs. 36,954. 2. The assessee appealed against the aforesaid order under section 154 to the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide his order dated31-3-1983quashed the demand for interest by observing, inter alia, as follows: "6. Again this action of the assessing officer cannot be upheld by me because, firstly, as is contended by the learned counsel, the assessing officer had not given a show-cause notice to the appellant bef....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....attempt. The learned Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, was right in our view to entertain the appeal and vacate the charging on interest mentioned in the demand notice. Such mention, in the demand notice, of interest was purely on account of change of opinion as the assessing authorities had an option which was not exercised earlier no doubt the facts were the same. The learned IAC (Assessment)'s action, therefore, was not tenable on account of the change of opinion also." 4. In the meanwhile the assessee had put in an application under section 154. While passing the order under section 154, on the request of the assessee, the IAC (Assessment) again demanded interest under section 216 and under section 139 ignoring the order of the Comm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... --------- 11,30,548 Less : Already paid 10,60,906 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted earlier, in the meanwhile, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) dated31-3-1983came up for consideration before the Tribunal on18-9-1984and they confirmed the same as noted above. 5. The assessee again appealed against the second order under section 154 passed by the IAC (Assessment) on 27-10-1983 to the Commissioner (Appeals) who had the benefit of the order of the Tribunal passed in the meanwhile on 18-9-1984. The said Commissioner (Appeals) after a very elaborate analysis of the facts has given the finding that his predecessor had wrongly appreciated the facts in question and that the real facts were as brought out by the IAC (Assessment) in his second order under section 154, namely, that the interest under sections 139 and 216....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ayan Singh [1965] 56 ITR 234. He also placed reliance on the observations of their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhopal Sugar Industries Ltd. v. ITO [1960] 40 ITR 618 wherein their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court had stated, inter alia, as below: "If the ITO fails to carry out the directions given by the Tribunal in its appellate order, which has become final, such a failure is destructive of a basic principle of justice and a writ of mandamus should issue debito justitiae to compel him to carry out the directions given by the Tribunal. Even the Court issuing the mandamus is not empowered to hold that such an order of the Tribunal is wrong." 7. On behalf of the revenue, it is pointed out that the facts a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oner (Appeals) dated31-3-1983which was been confirmed by the Tribunal would make this position apparently clear. It was with regard to the above demands that the Commissioner (Appeals) held, though erroneously, that the demand in question had been created through the demand notice issued along with the order under section 154. This order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was appealed against by the revenue before the Tribunal but unfortunately for the department the mistake in question was never brought to the attention of the Tribunal by the departmental representative even though the second order under section 154 had been passed by the IAC (Assessment) in the meanwhile on 27-10-1983 and he had detected the mistake in question. Thus the Tribu....