TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (2) TMI 87
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsions of the project and the difficulty in ascertaining profits accruing to the assessee from year to year in respect of this project, there was an agreement between the assessee and the Central Board of Direct Taxes under which a special arrangement was approved. Basically a provisional profit or loss on the Project for each year was to be estimated and recorded in the books of the assessee. The assessee was to make an on account tax payment annually in relation to the receipt of Station rupee payments under the Tarapur Project and tax demands were to be based on the assumption of a provisional rate of profit at 6.04 per cent. In respect of the assessment year 1966-67, the Income-tax Officer had issued a demand notice for payment of ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efund of tax paid under section 210 only. The assessment form set out that the net amount refundable to the assessee was Rs, 19,10,111. The assessee preferred an appeal against the assessment order on certain points which did not involve the question of correctness of the amount of refund granted or the question of payment of interest under section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal which was on other grounds was disposed of by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner by his order dated May 14, 1973. In the meanwhile, in view of the assessment order dated May 30, 1972, the assessee received a notice of demand dated February 5, 1972 (sic), in which a sum of Rs. 22,64,002 was shown as refundable to the assessee for the concerned asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iling of an estimate by the assessee of total income for the purpose of advance payment of tax which estimate was for an income less than the income on the basis of which advance tax had been demanded by the Income-tax Officer. Section 212(3A) which provides for filing an estimate when the income envisaged was higher than the income on the basis of which demand notice was issued by the Income-tax Officer, was introduced only on April 1, 1969. Hence, the assessee could not be considered as having paid the extra advance tax under section 212. Hence, under section 214 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the present case the assessee was not entitled to claim interest on the tax paid in advance on the basis of a higher income envisaged by the asses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch an order. This contention was also negatived by the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the letter dated December 17, 1973, issued by the Income-tax Officer was not an order of rectification under section 154 and that the assessee himself did not consider the appeal which was preferred before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner as one directed against such an order. The Tribunal further held that even if the appeal by the assessee were to be considered as competent, the assessee was not entitled to dispute the determination of interest under the provisions of section 214 of the Income- tax Act. In view of these findings of the Tribunal, the following two questions have been referred to us under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961': ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ghtly rejected by the Tribunal. In the first place, the assessee has not produced before us any letter addressed by it to the Income-tax Officer applying for any rectification of the assessment order of September 30, 1972. The only document which is before us is the letter dated December 17, 1973. This letter clarifies that as per the assessment form dated September 30, 1972, the assessee was entitled for a refund only of Rs. 19,10,111. In the demand notice, the figure was wrongly mentioned as Rs. 22,64,002. Hence, the demand notice dated July 5, 1972, may be treated as corrected to that extent. Thus, mistake in the demand notice is corrected by this letter, to bring it in line with the correct figure in the order of assessment. The fact th....