TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1997 (7) TMI 200
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') were carried out at various business and residential premises of the assessee. In the course of search, various incriminating papers and books of account and valuables were found and seized. In the assessment proceedings explanation was sought from the assessee on various points like sales, purchases, expenses and about various cash credits. It transpires from the assessment orders that the assessee was ready to explain everything in detail and was also willing to produce the parties with whom it had business dealings. However, it appears that, after several rounds of discussion the assessee, through its counsel, agreed to a specified amount of assessment in each year. It is on record that main reason for the assessee to agree to a specified assessment was to put an end to litigation. Accordingly, the assessments for all the three years were completed on 26/27-3-1991 as follows : Assessment year 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 Returned income 21,141 (-) 5,618 99,470 Assessed income : ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tain factors, his right to appeal did not vanish. This was more so in the present cases where the offer as made was not accepted but the income was assessed at higher amounts. 7. For the proposition that admission was not always binding where proper reasons existed, the learned counsel relied on the decisions in Chhat Mull Aggarwal v. CIT [1979] 116 ITR 694 (Punj. & Har.), Smt. Bhagwant Kaur v. CIT [1997] 223 ITR 242 (Punj. & Har.), CIT v. M. Pyngrope [1993] 200 ITR 106 (Gauhati) and Federal Bank Ltd. v. State of Kerala AIR 1995 Ker. 62. For the proposition that the assessee can deny his liability, reliance was placed on the decision in CIT v. Kanpur Coal Syndicate [1964] 53 ITR 225 (SC). On the doctrine of approbate and reprobate, the learned counsel relied on the decision in CIT v. V. MR. P. Firm [1965] 56 ITR 67 (SC). Finally, it was contended that the provisions relating to the right to appeal should be liberally construed. For this, reliance was placed on the decision in 94 ITR 645 (SC) (sic). Thus, it was pleaded that this was a fit case to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer to make de novo assessment. 8. The learned D.R. submitted that as the assessment was made o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is that it is objecting to the amount of income determined by the Assessing Officer. Thus, the assessee's case clearly falls within the circumstances mentioned at item (ii) above. However, this is not enough. It is yet to be seen whether the assessee can be said to be aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer or not. This will ultimately clinch the issue, depending on the facts of the case, which we now proceed to deal with. 12. The CIT(Appeals) held that the assessee cannot be said to have any grievance as the assessment was on agreed basis. In other words, according to the CIT(Appeals), since the assessee had itself offered the income for taxation, it cannot be permitted to feel aggrieved and contest the same. Now we examine the facts in each year. Asst. year 1987-88 : 12.1 From the correspondence that took place between the assessee and the department, particularly the letters of the assessee dated 14/21-5-1991 (page 1 of revenue's paper book), 14-3-1991 (page 3 of the same paper book), it is clear that the assessee offered Rs. 4.00 lacs over and above the declared business income of Rs. 49,184. The order-sheet entries dated 3-3-1991 and 14-3-1991 (pages 9 & 10 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee cannot be said to be aggrieved. This is also the sum and substance of the various decisions cited before us. 14. A plea has been raised that entire sales, purchase and other entries in the books are verifiable and, hence, the Assessing Officer erred in rejecting the books of account. From the correspondence placed on record, we observe that the assessee itself was conscious of this fact but despite that the assessee itself made the concession for want of time. The assessee has a duty to prove the entries in the books, but instead of doing so, the assessee conceded to be taxed on a particular income which the Assessing officer accepted. It is not a case where the assessee waived any of its rights at the assessment stage granted under the statute, on the contrary, it eschewed performing its duty. Hence, while accepting the concession, the Assessing Officer did not violate either any statutory provision, or the principles of natural justice. Hence, this plea also raised in the grounds, cannot be accepted. 15. Another plea raised in the grounds is that the lower authorities erred in placing reliance on the discussion, if any, in the course of hearing with the authorised repr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evy of interest was bad in law. The learned D.R. submitted that the levy was automatic and hence no notice was required to be issued. 20. Since the learned counsel has put-forth his arguments very vehemently on this issue, we need to deal with it in greater detail. Firstly, the Supreme Court, in the case of J.K. Synthetics Ltd., has not denied that the provisions for levy and collection of interest are part of machinery provisions. What the Supreme Court emphasized is that such a provision must be construed [Emphasis supplied] as a substantive law and not adjectival law. The word 'construe' means to analyse or interprete. Thus, as per our understanding of the said decision, the Supreme Court wanted to convey that though the provisions for charging interest may be part of machinery provisions, the rule of strict construction should apply to them. If they are construed like any other statute, it may lead to conflicts and create anomalies. In order to lay extra emphasis on this aspect, the Supreme Court observed as follows : "But it must also be realised that provision by which the authority is empowered to levy and collect interest, even if construed as forming part of the ....