ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SUDERSHAN TALKIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE references are connected with IT Ref. Nos. 48 -50/75 which have been disposed of by judgment delivered today. Briefly stated the facts are that in respect of asst. yrs. 1967 -68 to 1969 - 70, the ITO passed assessment orders but did not levy any interest under S. 217 nor initiated proceedings under S. 273(b) of the Act because of the non -compliance by the assessee of the provision of S. 212 of the Act.

(2.) THE CIT then exercised jurisdiction under S. 263 and set aside the assessment order and directed the ITO to charge interest under S. 217 and also to initiate penalty proceedings under s. 273(b) of the Act. That decision of the CIT was set aside before the Tribunal. The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT insofar as it relates to the charging of interest under S. 217. The Tribunal, however, set aside the order of the CIT which had directed the initiation of proceedings under s. 263 against the assessee. Against that decision reference applications were filed being IT Ref. 48 - 50 of 1975 which have been decided in favour of the assessee.

(3.) IT is clear from our decision in IT Ref. 48 -50/1975 since reported as Addl. CIT vs. Sudershan Talkies (1993) 111 CTR (Del) 368 that the fresh assessment which was made by the ITO was rightly annulled by the AAC. The decision of the Tribunal against the order passed under S. 263 has been upheld by us in IT Refs. 48 to 50 of 1975 as a consequence thereof only the interest can be charged but no proceedings under S. 273 could be initiated. This has been reaffirmed by the AAC and the Tribunal in the present case. The question of law is, therefore, answered in favour of the assessee. There will be no order as to costs.