TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1986 (2) TMI 98
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovision of the law. (2) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. AAC of IT erred in admitting appeal against the charge of interest under ss. 139(8) and 217 of the IT Act, 1961 and in that view erred in deleting the interest so charged under ss. 139(8) and 217 of the IT Act, 1961" 2. The assessee had constructed a house at 50 Subarban Park Road, Howrahy and showed the cost of construction at Rs. 3,06,300. The ITO made enquiry and estimated the cost of construction at Rs. 3,55,000. The difference between the two amounting to Rs. 48,000 was considered to be in income from undisclosed sources during the three asst. yrs. 1975-76, 1976-77 and 1977-78. The distribution was worked out at Rs. 9,600, 28,800 and Rs. 9,600....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly when the only ground taken in the appeal was regarding the charging of such interest. Hence, he urged that the AAC should not have admitted the appeals and so he prayed for the quashing of the order of the AAC and the restoration of that of the ITO. Shri G.C. Sinha, the ld. representative for the assessee, on the other hand, supported the order of the AAC. He stated that charging of interest has been held to be appealable by the Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lalit Prasad Rohini Kumar (1979) 8 CTR (Cal) 322 : (1979) 117 ITR 603 (Cal). He drew our attention to the observations at page 612 which read as under: "We have noticed the expressions used in the first limb of cl. (e) of s. 246. It deals with cases where the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against the charging of interest. There are a number of decisions on the appealability of orders of the ITO directing to charge interest. However, we will confine ourselves to the decisions of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court Which are binding on us. We have gone through the three decisions of the Calcutta High Court on this point viz. (1) Lalit Prasad (1979) 117 ITR 603 (cal), (2) CIT vs. Karam Chand Thapar (1979) 119 ITR 751 (Cal) and (3) New Swadeshi Mills (1984) 147 ITR 163 (Cal). We find one common feature in all the three decisions, namely, that the objection to the charging of interest was not the only ground taken before the first appellate authority. Such a ground was taken in conjunction with another ground or other grounds. The ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... AAC is whether the assessee is denying its liability to pay interest at all, If this is so, then the AAC will consider the matter further. If not the appeal should be rejected In limine. We would like to observe that unless a proper ground in clearly made out on the lines as indicated earlier the assessee may be shut out from agitating a ground against imposition of interest in its appeal." On the same page it has also been observed: "Where the liability to be assessed and/or to pay interest is not totally denied by the assessee, objection to the imposition of interest will necessarily be an objection either as to commutation or as to the method or manner of imposition of interest. Such objection cannot be agitated by the assessee in....