1984 (8) TMI 143

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....espectively. There are more or less common points in all these appeals and the deletion of interest charged under section 139(8) and section 217 has been challenged in these appeals. They, are, therefore, being disposed of by this common order. 2. The ITO while passing the assessment order had not given any direction that interest should be charged under section 139(8) or section 217. However, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....AAC relying on (1983) 139 ITR 498 (Cal.) and number of other rulings that interest cannot be charged under sections 139 & 217 in reassessment proceedings. The AAC accepted both these contentions and deleted the levy of interest. 4. Before us, the learned Departmental Representative contests the correctness of its orders. He has relied on the karnataka High Court ruling in Commissioner v. R. Gir....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ITR 382 ( J& K) and Monohar Gidwany v. Commissioner (1983) 139 ITR 498 (Cal.) are clearly authorities for the proposition that unless the order of assessment itself incorporates an order for the payment of interest, the assessee cannot be asked by means of a demand notice to pay penal interest both under sections 139 & 217 of the Income-tax Act. The rulings on which the learned Departmental Repre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1984) 145 ITR (Kar.) 246 is also not directly on the point at issue and does not deal with the question of interest at all. We therefore, hold that the ITO was not justified in charging interest without passing specific order in the assessment order itself. 6. That apart, it has been held in (1983) 139 ITR 498 (Cal.) by the Calcutta High Court that though assessment includes reassessment a regu....