M MATHEW Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal referred the following question, relating to the consecutive asst. yrs. 1976-77, 1977-78 and 1978-79, for the opinion of this Court :

(2.) THE facts, as found by the Tribunal, are that the assessee was a partner in the firms, Muthoottu Mini Chitty Fund, M. George Bros., Chitty Fund, etc. While making assessment for the years under consideration, the AO charged interest under S. 215 of the IT Act, 1961 ('the Act'). The assessee approached the Settlement Commission. Pursuant to the order of the Settlement Commission, the AO passed orders dt. 5th Feb., 1985 for the relevant years (see Annexures D1 to D3) stating that the assessments in the case of the assessee stood revised on the basis of which total tax payable by the assessee was much higher than that shown in original returns. He, therefore, re-computed the interest payable under S. 215 by the assessee and raised the demand accordingly.

(3.) THE dispute was further carried in appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal and the latter simply held that interest was charged under S. 215 and, hence, no appeal could lie against the orders dt. 5th Feb., 1985, passed by the AO.