Skip to content


Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Eastern Art Corporation - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectDirect Taxation
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided On
Case NumberIncome-tax Reference No. 144 of 1976
Judge
Reported in[1985]156ITR881(Delhi)
ActsIncome Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 139 and 246
AppellantCommissioner of Income-tax
RespondentEastern Art Corporation
Appellant Advocate Wazir Singh, Adv
Respondent Advocate Inder Sain, Adv.
Cases ReferredMohanlal Soni v. Union of India
Excerpt:
- .....some courts have taken a different line, but there are many decisions which are in accord with the delhi high court and we do not find any reason to hold that the question of interest cannot be gone into when there is a competent appeal. in fact, something can be said for the view that when an appeal lies under section 246(c), then the only point in issue is the interest under section 139 of the act. as, in the present case, we do not have to analyze this question, we would refrain from dealing with the same. we would only refer to the decision of the calcutta high court in mohanlal soni v. union of india : [1983]143itr436(cal) , where it was held that an appeal lies also against an order imposing interest under section 139.4. the aforementioned decision of the delhi high court has.....
Judgment:

D.K. Kapur, J.

1. For the assessment year 1968-69, the following question has been referred to us :

' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that an appeal under Section 246 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is maintainable against the order of the Income-tax Officer charging interest under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'

2. This point has been decided by a Bench of this court in CIT v. Mahabir Parshad and Sons : [1980]125ITR165(Delhi) and it has been held that if there is a competent appeal from an assessment order under Section 246(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, then the question of interest under Section 139 may also be dealt with by the appellate order, but by itself no appeal lies. As in the present case, the appeal was competent, it was open to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to deal also with the question of interest under Section 139.

3. It was urged by learned counsel for the Revenue that the said decision requires re-examination. We are aware of the fact that some courts have taken a different line, but there are many decisions which are in accord with the Delhi High Court and we do not find any reason to hold that the question of interest cannot be gone into when there is a competent appeal. In fact, something can be said for the view that when an appeal lies under Section 246(c), then the only point in issue is the interest under Section 139 of the Act. As, in the present case, we do not have to analyze this question, we would refrain from dealing with the same. We would only refer to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Mohanlal Soni v. Union of India : [1983]143ITR436(Cal) , where it was held that an appeal lies also against an order imposing interest under Section 139.

4. The aforementioned decision of the Delhi High Court has elaborately examined the various decisions regarding the scope of an appeal under Section 246 and we do not find any reason to differ from the same.

5. We accordingly answer the question referred to us in the affirmative on the basis of the judgment of this court in CIT v. Mahabir Parshad and Sons : [1980]125ITR165(Delhi) , aforementioned. The answer is in favor of the assessed, but there will be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //