HAZARIMAL REKHCHAND Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question of law in this reference at the instance of the assessee reads thus :

(2.) THE facts are admitted. The assessment of the assessee, a registered firm, for the asst. yr. 1966 67 was completed on a total income of Rs. 98,445. Besides determining the tax payable by the firm, the ITO charged interest of Rs. 11,475 under proviso to S. 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee was not aggrieved by the determination of the total income or the tax payable thereon as such. Its only ground before the AAC was against the charge of interest under S. 139(1). In response to a query from the AAC as to how the appeal filed by the assessee was competent, the assessee relied on the provisions of S. 246(c) of the IT Act. In paragraph 3 of his order, the AAC has analysed the provisions of S. 246(c) with reference to S. 143(3) in the light of this Court's decision in the case of Mathuradas B. Mohta vs. CIT (1965) 56 ITR 269 (Bom) : TC6R.645 and held that the appeal against levy of interest under proviso (iii) to S. 139(1) was not competent. Further appeal of the assessee to the Tribunal met the same fate.