TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (2) TMI 317
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. yr. 1989-90 disclosing total income at Rs. 90,870 on which the assessee paid the advance tax and TDS as under: 10-9-1988 Rs. 13,000 12-12-1988 Rs. 21,000 14-3-1989 Rs. 26,900 TDS on contract Rs. 3,150 &nb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g of interest is mandatory as and when the default is occurred. The interest under s. 234B is payable when the default is in respect of payment of advance tax and interest under s. 234C is payable When default is for deferment of advance tax. The levy of interest is automatic as arid when the default exist irrespective of the reason of default. Sec. 246 also does not provide any appeal against the charging of such interest. The judgment of the Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. vs. CIT (1986) 58 CTR (SC) 112 : (1986) 160 ITR 961 (SC) would not apply in this case as the provisions of s. 234A, 234B and 234C were not there when the judgment was rendered. Having regard to these facts, the appeal of the appellant is rejected and the levy o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntative, strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that the CIT(A) rightly held that the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd. was distinguishable and accordingly, no appeal lies under s. 246 of the Act against the levy of interest under s. 234B and 234C of the Act, charging of interest being mandatory as and when the default is occurred. 6. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the facts on record. We find that the interests have been levied only because of the amendment to the Act with retrospective effect and but for such amendment with retrospective effect, such interests were not chargeable at all. The assessee accordingly at the time o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f to the ground that he is not liable to the levy at all." 7. From the above, it is to be noted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has clearly held that appeal lies against levy of interest. In this context, there is no merit in the contention of the CIT(A) that in the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court the issue was regarding the levy of interest under ss. 215, 139(8) while in the present case, it is about the levy of interest under s. 234A, 234B and 234C. These interests are also a part of the process of assessment and thus, the reasoning given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as stated above would be clearly applicable in this context as well. We accordingly hold that the CIT(A) is not justified in holding that there is no appeal provided ....