TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (7) TMI 113
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....siness loss incurred by the petitioner at Rs. 7,18,78,768 and the long-term capital loss at Rs. 1,82,19,212 aggregating Rs. 9,00,97,980. In making the assessment respondent No. 2 disallowed the petitioner's claim for interest to the extent of Rs. 11,98,97,222. A copy of the said order is annexed to the petition as exhibit "A" and is to be found at pages 21 to 24. 4. As the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had dismissed the petitioner's appeal the petitioner preferred an appeal to respondent No. 1 in accordance with section 253 and consistent with its stand that the requisite fee payable was Rs. 500, the Form 36 that was filed in the registry was accompanied by a challan evidencing payment of a fee of Rs. 500. 5. The registry of respondent No. 1, by its letter dated August 25, 2009, communicated the defect in the memo of appeal inasmuch as the appeal fee paid was less by Rs. 9,500 and invited the petitioner's attention to a decision of the Tribunal reported in Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board v. ITO [1994] 49 ITD 552. The petitioner was called upon to rectify the defect within ten days from the date of receipt of the letter According to the petitioner, as there was no sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the income goes up the fees accordingly are higher. Similarly, when the loss goes up, the fees will also go on increasing. 9. For the purpose of deciding the controversy, we may gainfully refer to the provisions of section 253(6) which reads as under: "253. Appeals to the Appellate Tribunal -... (6) An appeal to the Appellate Tribunal shall be in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner and shall, in the case of an appeal made, on or after the 1st day of October, 1998, irrespective of the date of initiation of the assessment proceedings relating thereto, be accompanied by a fee of, (a) where the total income of the assessee as computed by the Assessing Officer, in the case to which the appeal relates, is one hundred thousand rupees or less, five hundred rupees, (b) where the total income of the assessee, computed as aforesaid, in the case to which the appeal relates is more than one hundred thousand rupees but not more than two hundred thousand rupees, one thousand five hundred rupees, (c) where the total income of the assessee, computed as aforesaid, in the case to which the appeal relates is more than two hundred thousand rupees, one per cent. of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12. The Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, once again amended section 253(6) and it was provided that if the total income was less than rupees one lakh, the fee payable would be Rs. 500. However, if the assessed total income was more than Rs. one lakh but not more than rupees two lakhs, the fees payable would be Rs. 1,500 and if the assessed total income was more than rupees two lakhs the fee payable would be one per cent, of the assessed income subject to a maximum of Rs. 10,000. There was no provision similar to clause (d), as it now stands, in the amended provision. The object behind the insertion of the said provision was that the existing scale of fees was not a deterrent for filing of a large number of unnecessary appeals thus slowing down the disposal of the appeals and, hence, it was decided to enhance the limit. 13. Section 253(6) was once again amended by the Finance Act, 1999, and clause (d) was inserted in sub-section (6). The Object behind the amendment was explained in Circular No. 779, dated September 14, 1999 ([1999] 240 ITR (St.) 3, 41) as under: "The Finance (No. 2) Act, 1998, introduced a scale of fees for filing appeals before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... As an illustration in section 253(6)(a), the words used as "one hundred thousand rupees or less". In (b), the language used is "more than one hundred thousand rupees but not more than two hundred thousand rupees" and in (c) it is "more than two hundred thousand rupees". In so far as (a) is concerned, therefore, the expression used "one hundred thousand rupees or less; in (b) "more than" and in (c) "more than". What does these expressions "more or less" indicate? In Concise Oxford Dictionary, Tenth Edition "more" means greater or additional amount or degree. In Webster Universal Dictionary, "more" means greater in number, size, amount, degree quantity and/or a greater or additional quantity, amount, portion, number, etc. In the Law Lexicon the expression "more" greater in amount, extent, number or degree. Considering this dictionary meaning it would be clear that the word "more" has been understood to mean greater or additional. Similarly, the word "less" in Concise Oxford Dictionary has been explained as, smaller amount of, fewer in number, to a smaller extent. Can, therefore, the language used in sub-clauses (b) and (c) of section 253(6) be read in the context of a loss which has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0] 183 ITR 559 merely follows the principle laid down in Gotla's case [1985] 156 ITR 323 (SC). The Supreme Court had to consider whether the assessee was entitled to carry forward to the subsequent years not only his share but also the share of loss of his wife from a firm in which both were partners. The Revenue was of the view that the clubbing provision would apply only to income and not a loss which contention was rejected by the High Court and on further appeal by the Supreme Court. This decision, therefore, also does not throw any light on the issue that this hon'ble court has to consider. 20. In our opinion, on the plain interpretation of section 253(6) there can be no doubt that the petitioner was not obliged to pay the fee in excess of Rs. 500. The words "less and more" must be given the ordinary meaning. In the instant case, the petitioner has been admittedly assessed to loss. In such a case, there are two possible ways of determining what is the total income computed by the Assessing Officer. The first is that the petitioner is assessed to a nil income and has been permitted to carry forward a loss that is determined or, secondly, that the petitioner is assessed to an a....