2018 (8) TMI 865

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....titioner, herein after referred to as the assessee . 2. The facts in a nutshell are as under: The assessee filed a settlement application under Section 245C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the 1961 Act on 19.1.1996 for settlement of his case pertaining to assessment years 1992-1993 to 1994-1995. By order dated 28.8.1996 in S.A.No.21/V/88/95-IT, the said application was allowed to be proceeded with under Section 245D(1) of the 1961 Act. 3. Likewise, the assessee filed another settlement application under Section 245C of the 1961 Act on 4.3.1998 for settlement of his case pertaining to assessment years 1995-1996. By order dated 27.5.1998, the said application was allowed to be proceeded with under Section 245D(1)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stake with regard to the terminal date for levy of interest under Section 234B of the 1961 Act, in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carrier, reported in (2003) 126 Taxman 321, where the Supreme Court held that interest under Section 234B is to be payable till the date on which the Settlement Commission passes the order under Section 245D(4) of the 1961 Act. 7. The Settlement Commission, vide order dated 28.11.2003, held that there was no case for waiver of interest leviable under Section 234B of the 1961 Act and that the interest under Section 234B of the 1961 Act would be charged up to the date of the order under Section 245D(4) of the 1961 Act. 8. The assessee filed a writ petition, being W.P.N....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the 1961 Act to levy interest under Section 234B of the 1961 Act. To fortify the said argument, he placed reliance on the decisions in (i) Brij Lal and others v. CIT, supra; and (ii) U.Narayanamma and others v. Government of India, reported in (2013) 352 ITR 598 (AP). 12. Section 154 of the 1961 Act reads as under: "Section 154. Rectification of mistake. (1) With a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record an income-tax authority referred to in section 116 may, (a) amend any order passed by it under the provisions of this Act ; (b) amend any intimation or deemed intimation under sub-section (1) of section 143; (c) amend any intimation under sub-section (1) of section 200A; ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere any such amendment has the effect of reducing the assessment or otherwise reducing the liability of the assessee or the deductor or the collector, the Assessing Officer shall make any refund which may be due to such assessee or the deductor or the collector. (6) Where any such amendment has the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee or the deductor or the collector, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee or the deductor or the collector, as the case may be a notice of demand in the prescribed form specifying the sum payable, and such notice of demand shall be deemed to be issued under section 156 and the provisions of this Act shall a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... looking over something again with a view to correct or improve. 15. It is well settled that the power of review is not an inherent power. Such power has to be conferred by statute either expressly or by necessary implication. In this case, there is no power of review. However, the power of rectifying an apparent mistake under Section 154 of the 1961 Act includes wide power to amend the order, which has the effect of enhancing an assessment or increasing the liability of the assessee. 16. In M.A.Murthy v. State of Karnataka, reported in (2003) 264 ITR 1 (SC), the Supreme Court reiterated that the decision of the Supreme Court that enunciated a principle of law is applicable to all cases irrespective of the stage of pendency, because i....