TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (10) TMI 883
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said return was revised on 13.8.1986 declaring an income of Rs. 7,49,547/- which included share from a registered firm M/s K. and Company, New Delhi at Rs. 8,28,669/-. The assessment was completed by respondent No.2 on 29.1.1988 at an income of Rs.7,67,880/-. The share from the registered firm was accepted at the returned figure subject to rectification under Sections 154/155 of the Act. The tax on the assessed income worked out to Rs. 4,54,774/-against which the petitioner had deposited the advance tax at Rs.5,90,670/-. Thus, the refund of excess advance tax along with interest under Section 214 of the Act was allowed to the petitioner. No penal interest under Sections 215 and 139(8) of the Act was charged from the petitioner. On completion of the assessment of M/s K. and Company where the petitioner's share was determined at Rs. 20,82,312/-, the assessee moved an application dated 16.7.1988 to respondent No.2 for passing the rectification order under Sections 154/155 of the Act. Respondent No.2 issued a letter dated 23.9.1988 to the petitioner to show cause as to why the interest paid under Section 214 of the Act allowed to him at the time of making the assessment on 29.1.1988 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing Officer had failed to levy interest under Sections 215 and 139(8) of the Act at the time of regular assessment, it was not open to the revenue to invoke the provisions of Section 154 of the Act in such a situation. Learned counsel also submitted that no notice under Section 154(3) of the Act was issued to the assessee and, therefore, the order under Section 154 of the Act was bad. Support was sought by the learned counsel for the assessee from the following judgments:- I. CIT v. S.L. Chopra [1989] 179 ITR 65; II. CIT v. Inderjeet Bedi [2002] 257 ITR 671; III. CIT v. G.B. Transports [1985] 155 ITR 548; IV. CIT v. Multimetals Ltd. [1991] 187 ITR 98; V. CIT v. I.O.L. Ltd. [2001] 250 ITR 185; VI. CIT v. Ram Lal Babu Lal [1998] 234 ITR 776; VII. CIT v. Pratap Chand Maheshwari [1980] 124 ITR 653; VIII. CIT v. Smt. Parvati Devi [1983] 141 ITR 738; IX. CIT v. Mahinder Singh [1985] 156 ITR 882; X. CESC Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 233 ITR 50 (SC) 5. Controverting the aforesaid submissions, learned counsel for the revenue submitted that there was a mistake apparent on the face of the record in the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... upon the amount by which the advance tax so paid falls short of the assessed tax. Provided that in the case of an assessee, being a company, the provisions of this sub-section shall have effect as if for the words "seventy-five per cent", the words "eighty-three and one-third per cent" had been substituted. (2)** ** ** (3) Where as a result of an order under section 147 or section 154 or section 155 or section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264, the amount on which interest was payable under sub-section (1) has been increased or reduced, as the case may be, the interest shall be increased or reduced accordingly, and - (i) in a case where the interest is increased, the Income Tax Officer shall serve on the assessee, a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum payable, and such notice of demand shall be deemed to be a notice under section 156 and the provisions of this Act shall apply accordingly. (ii) in a case where the interest is reduced, the excess interest paid, if any, shall be refunded. (4) to (6)** ** ** 9. It will be noticed from the wordings ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....88 had adopted the share of the assessee from the firm M/s K & Co. at the declared figure. This was subject to rectification under Sections 154/155 which could be less or more from the assessed figure. Later on, on the basis of an application filed under Sections 154/155 by the assessee on 16.7.1988 (Annexure P-2), the order dated 29.1.1988 was rectified under Sections 154/155 on 29.9.1988/3.10.1988 (Annexure P-3). When the said order was passed, there was shortfall in payment of advance tax for which the assessee was liable to pay interest under Sections 215 and 139(8) of the Act which was quantified at Rs.2,63,877/- and Rs.8000/-, respectively. However, on an application filed by the assessee under Rule 40 of the 1962 Rules, the interest under Section 215 of the Act was reduced to Rs.1,35,936/-. The assessment order passed on 29.1.1988 itself provided that the order was subject to rectification under Sections 154/155 of the Act which was dependent upon final assessment relating to share of the assessee in the firm M/s K. & Co. The order passed on 29.9.1988/3.10.1988 was, thus, regular assessment order and under the circumstances, it could not be said that it was beyond the scope ....