2000 (9) TMI 35

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....deducted at source. Section 201(1A) is involved. It is said that the Assessing Officer, for all the assessment years excepting only one, wrongly passed orders in this regard as, by Notification No. S.O. 1536, dated April 10, 1989, the jurisdiction in that regard had gone over to the Income-tax Officer (TDS) with effect from May 8, 1989. The aggregate amount of interest exceeds Rs. 3 crores. On the merits, the assessee was not successful. The point was also taken for the first time only before the Tribunal. We first thought that the point of jurisdiction does not involve a substantial question of law but only a petty, or a hole-picking one. Section 260A(1) reads as follows : "(1) An appeal shall lie to the High Court from every orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n section 246(1)(i), the word "shall" cannot be mandatory, because then the appellate provision will be, partly at least, useless. There are many parts of the Income-tax Act where the word "shall" has not been given an inflexible mandatory meaning. We wish to examine this question upon a fuller and fairer consideration of the entirety of the Act. We were persuaded to entertain the appeal on this point, on the following dictum of Lord Coke given in the Lincoln College's case . . . "the office of a good expositor of an act of Parliament, is to make construction on all parts together, and not of one part only by itself". The third issue related to natural justice. For the assessment year 1985-86 only, the correct officer had exercised ju....