Ltd., Rs.1,25,000/ ix Unexplained investment in acquisition of shares in M s. R. Transports.
The demand raised by the assessing officer was number met by the appellants.
Interest was levied on the income under Sections 243A, 243B and 243C. After crediting the appellant with the amounts already paid, a sum of Rs.23,044.00 was calculated as the balance due.
It is number in dispute that the modified demand was number paid by the appellant on the date when the declaration was filed.
By an order dated 31.3.1995 the appellant was assessed to tax under Section 143 3 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assistant Commissioner.
The Assessing Officer recorded the companycession and by order dated 31.12.1998 re computed the appellants total income.
Thus the question of imposition of interest under Section 234A, 234B and 234C and the determination in respect of items iii and vii referred to above, even according to the High Courts view, was the subject matter of appeal.
In companyputing the demand on 31st December, 1998 the assessing officer included number only those items which had been remitted by the CIT A for re determination, and which were companyceded to by the appellant, but also the items which had been companyfirmed by the CIT A which had number been companyceded and were the subject matter of appeal before the Tribunal.
The appellant also challenged the levy of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C. By his order dated 30.9.1997, the CIT A partly allowed the appeal by companyfirming the additions in respect of items iii , iv , v and viii , setting aside the additions in respect of items ii , vi , viii and ix and remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer for re determination and modification of the amount under item i .
The appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner Appeal referred to as CIT A objecting to the following additions in the assessment order Share of profit from M s. Raju Investment taken at Rs.6,85,668/ as against Rs.1,85,250/ shown in the return.
The CIT A who was the designated authority under the scheme rejected the declaration filed by the appellant by his order dated 26.2.1999.
The appellant filed her declaration under Section 88 of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1992 93 on 28.1.1999.
The determination was modified by the orders dated 17.11.1997 and 31.12.1998 pursuant to the CIT A s order.
After adjustment of pre paid taxes Rs.40,74,820/ remained payable.
The appellant paid the amount as companyputed by the order dated 17.11.1997 as modified on 2.1.1998 before 31.3.1998.
The determination on 31.12.1998 was number a fresh assessment for the purposes of the scheme but the modification of the original determination by the assessment order dated 29.3.1996.
The order dated 31.12.1998 also directed the demand to be paid as per demand numberice and challan enclosed.
Rs.24,000/ .
However, despite the DGITs order, the assessing officer imposed interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C. After giving credit for the amount paid by the appellant, the tax liability for the assessment year 1992 93 was worked out at Rs.22,05,925/ .
ii Unexplained investment in acquisition of jewellery Rs.23,07,809/ iii Value of stones other than diamonds studded in jewellery Rs.1,09,419/ iv Unexplained cash found from locker Rs.2,50,000/ Interest on debentures number shown in return Rs.3,690/ vi Unexplained amount received from Bombay Rs.45,000/ vii Unexplained investment in acquisition of 8000 shares in Duphar Interfran Ltd. Rs.80,000/ viii Unexplained investment in acquisition of shares of M s Techno Pharma Pvt.
Criminal proceedings under Section 271 1 c were initiated separately.
As far as those additions which were set aside for re determination by the Assessing Officer were companycerned, the appellant companyceded the departments companyputation and filed a letter dated 29.12.1998 to this effect before the Assessing Officer.
The total tax with interest determined was Rs.44,50,568/ .
By a subsequent order dated 2.1.1998, the assessing officer deleted the levy of interest under Sections 243A, 243B and 243C as the Director General IT had in the meanwhile, by an order dated 31.10.1997 directed waiver of the interest.
The income was re computed as Rs.12,16,303 and the tax thereon at Rs.6,56,042.
In addition, the appellant challenged the companyfirmation of the levy of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C. Pursuant to the order of CIT A , the Assessing Officer by order dated 17.11.1997 modified the assessment order for the assessment year 1992 93 in respect of item i and deducted the additions set aside by the CIT A .
The appellants challenge to the levy of interest was disallowed.
The appellant filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in which the appellant number only impugned the decision of the CIT A to the extent that it companyfirmed the additions under items iii and vii but also the direction to the Assessing Officer regarding the quantum of modification under item i and re determination in respect of items vi , vii and ix .
