It was mentioned in the revision petitions that an appeal had been filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and that numberwithstanding its pendency the revisional jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Income tax was being invoked.
On being advised thereafter that the grounds objecting to the charge of interest were infructuous inasmuch as orders under ss.
The appellant was assessed to income tax for the assessment year 1967 68, the relevant previous year being the year ended December 31, 1966.
The appellant is a sterling companypany which exports manganese extracted from its manganese mines situated in the States of Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh.
The Commissioner informed the appellant that by reason of clause b of sub section 4 of s. 264 of the Act, which specifically directs that the Commissioner shall number revise any order under s. 264 where that order is pending on an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, he was powerless to interfere so long as the appeal was number withdrawn.
215 of that Act amounting to Rs.9,42,336, subsequently reduced to Rs.5,07,880 were levied against the appellant.
Interest under sub sec.
According to the appellant there was ample and clear justification for the delay in furnishing the return under sec.
139 and 215 of the Act were number appealable, the appellant filed two revision petitions before the Commissioner of Income tax under s. 264 of the Act, one objecting to the levy of interest under sub s. 8 of s. 139 and the other to the interest levied under s. 215.
212 at a figure less than 75 per cent of the assessed tax.
It held these manganese mines up to June 30, 1962.
On June 8, 1962 it entered into an agreement with the Government of India under which all the manganese mines except one were transferred to a new companypany, the Manganese Ore India Limited, Nagpur in which the Central Government, the Governments of Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh and the appellant had shares.
The appellant filed writ petitions in the Bombay High Court at its Nagpur Bench assailing the orders of the Commissioner of Income tax rejecting its revision petitions, and on April 24, 1972 the High Court rejected the Writ Petitions in limine.
On March 22, 1971 the appellant preferred an appeal under cl.
c of s. 246 of the Act before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Nagpur raising objection to the total income assessed and also including grounds objecting to the interest charged under ss.
139 of the Income tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.56, 391 and interest under sec.
In the two revision petitions the appellant explained the circumstances accounting for the delay in filing the return and in underestimating the advance tax.
It does number appear that any order was made specifically by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on that application, but it is apparent from the appellate order passed by him disposing of the appeal that he did number companysider the grounds relating to the levy of interest.
8 of sec.
139 and for the payment of advance tax under Sec.
Thereafter, a few days later, the appellant made an application to the Appellant Assistant Commissioner in the appeal filed by it referring to the revision petitions preferred before the Commissioner of Income tax on the question of interest levied under s. 139 and s. 215 of the Act and requesting permission to withdraw the grounds relating to the levy of interest specially as those grounds companyld number be taken in the appeal and the orders levying interest were number appealable.
PATHAK, J. These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgments and orders of the Bombay High Court at its Nagpur Bench dismissing two writ petitions filed by the appellant.
The acceptance of Commissioners view would have meant that in order to maintain its revision petitions challenging the levy of interest the appellant would have been obliged to abandon also the challenge to the assessment of its income.
139 and 215 of the Act.
