TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (1) TMI 108
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....required the respondent-assessee to be charged interest under section 234B of the Act on account of non-payment of advance tax. Vide an order dated September 29, 1996, the Assessing Officer required the respondent-assessee to pay Rs. 23,48,846 as interest under section 234B of the Act. The order of the Revenue determining the liability of the respondent-assessee towards income-tax, as well as, on the issue of payment of interest under section 234B of the Act was subjected to challenge before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), as well as, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. It is not a matter of dispute that the aforesaid proceedings culminated on September 23, 2004. With the disposal of the appeals at the hands of the Income-tax Appel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nishing the return or any default or delay in payment of advance tax, before furnishing the return and the return shall be accompanied by proof of payment of such tax and interest. Explanation.-Where the amount paid by the assessee under this sub-section falls short of the aggregate of the tax and interest as aforesaid, the amount so paid shall first be adjusted towards the interest payable as aforesaid and the balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards the tax payable." 3. Referring to the Explanation under section 140A(1) of the Act, it is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the appellant, that the amount which was payable at the hands of the assessee was in the first instance liable to be adjusted against the interest li....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncome-tax Appellate Tribunal vide an order dated November 27, 2007. 5. Through the instant appeal, the Revenue has impugned the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated November 27, 2007. In the present appeal, the solitary issue under consideration is the validity of the order dated April 27, 2006, passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154 of the Act. 6. From the sequence of facts narrated hereinabove, it is apparent that the order passed by the Assessing Officer dated April 27, 2006, under section 154 of the Act, was an effort at his hands, to correct the order dated April 7, 2005, earlier passed by the Assessing Officer, while giving appeal effect to the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee, that the computation of interest under section 234B of the Act was determined by the Assessing Officer in the first instance by an order dated September 29, 1996, which ultimately culminated in an order dated March 23, 1998(passed under section 143 of the Act). After making the respondent-assessee liable to interest on account of delayed payment of advance tax, the period of limitation envisaged under section 154(7) of the Act, according to the learned counsel for the respondent-assessee, must be determined with reference to the order dated September 29, 1996/March 23, 1998, i.e., the date on which the Assessing Officer subjected the respondent-assessee to the liability under section 234B of the Act. It is, therefore, the submission....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of his power under section 154 of the Act was obviously the order dated April 7, 2005. The issue to be adjudicated upon while examining the submissions of learned counsel for the respondent, therefore, is whether the order dated April 27, 2006, was passed within the period of limitation stipulated under section 154(7) of the Act, while modifying/correcting the order dated April 7, 2005. Between the order dated April 7, 2005, and the order passed under section 154 of the Act dated April 27, 2006, the period of four years envisaged under section 154(7) of the Act had not elapsed, and as such, it cannot be stated that the order dated April 27, 2006, had been passed by the Assessing Officer, beyond the period of limitation stipulated therein....