1978 (4) TMI 90

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sment years 1962-63 to 1967-68, the assessee filed his return of income on June 25, 1968. For all these years, a consolidated assessment order was passed on March 13, 1969. In the normal course, the assessee received demand notices for each assessment year. The demand notices included certain amounts charged by way of interest for the delay in filing the return. The assessee filed an application f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ge interest, and if so, the assessee could invoke the provisions of section 154 of the Income-tax Act, were argued, but the Tribunal did not think it fit to go into these questions. In this view the controversy in the case boils down to the question whether the application filed by the assessee under section 154 of the Act was competent. The question was whether interest was chargeable under the t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... debatable cannot be said to be an error apparent on the record, the Tribunal held that an application under section 154 of the Act was rightly rejected. The appeal filed by the revenue was allowed. At the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal has referred the following question of law for our opinion : " Whether the Appellate Tribunal was, in the facts and circumstances of the case, justif....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion is whether a point of law, on which there may be difference of opinion, can be said to be a point on which if a particular view has been taken by the officer, there is an error apparent from the record. In T. S. Balaram, Income-tax Officer v. Volkart Brothers [1971] 82 ITR 50, the Supreme Court laid down the principle that a mistake apparent on the the record, must be an obvious and patent mi....