2002 (1) TMI 8

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f law involved herein is: "Whether in terms of section 17B of the Act the assessee can be held liable to pay interest for delay in filing the return of net wealth?" The assessment year involved is 1991-92. For this year the due date for filing the return under section 14 of the Act was June 30, 1991. But the assessees had filed the return much belatedly, i.e., on February 15, 1994. On December 13, 1994, a notice under section 17 of the Act was served on them requiring them to file the return. After receiving the notice the assessees sent a letter dated December 26, 1994, to treat the return filed as one under section 17(4) of the Act. Thereafter, the assessment was completed under section 16(3) of the Act. The net wealth was determine....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ing that omission to levy interest under section 17B of the Act is a mistake apparent on the face of the record warranting rectification? 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the appeal of the appellant requires to be dismissed in limine as non-maintainable?" The first three questions relate to leviability of statutory interest under section 17B of the Act. In order to appreciate the contention of the assessees we reproduce hereunder section 17B(1) of the Act: "17B. (1) Where the return of net wealth for any assessment year under sub-section (1) of section 14 or section 15, or in response to a notice under clause (i) of sub-section (4) of section 16....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has submitted that in relation to the assessment made under section 17 of the Act the provisions of levy of interest under section 17B are not applicable. In our opinion, the argument advanced is ex facie fallacious because Explanation 3 of section 17B(1) of the Act clearly covers the cases of assessment under section 17. The issue at hand regarding the mandatory nature of the liability under section 17B is directly supported by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Anjum M. H. Ghaswala [2001] 252 ITR 1. In this case the question had arisen with regard to levy of interest under sections 234A, 234B and 234C. The Supreme Court has held as follows: "Sections 234A, 234B and 234C in clear terms impose a mandate to collect in....