JUDGMENT
RUMA PAL J. - In this application, the writ petitioner has challenged a notice passed under [SECTION] of the [ACT] (referred to as "the Act"). By that notice, the income-tax authorities have sought to rectify an order of assessment dated August 21, 1979, in so far as it relates to the payment of interest under [SECTION] of the Act.
In my view, the impugned notice cannot be sustained on the simple ground that the income-tax authorities would have no reason to be aggrieved by the order of assessment dated August 21, 1979. The petitioner was initially assessed in respect of the year 1972-73 on March 10, 1975. An amount of Rs. 12,26,924 was found to be refundable to the petitioner being the difference between the advance tax paid and the tax payable on actual assessment. Interest was also allowed under [SECTION] of the Act for the period April 1, 1972, to the date of the assessment, namely, March 10, 1975. This initial order of assessment was rectified under [SECTION] of the Act by which the amount refundable was reduced to Rs. 11,40,225 leading to a consequent reduction in the interest payable. On March 4, 1977, an order was passed under [SECTION] of the Act by the Commissioner of Income-tax by which the original order of assessment dated March 10, 1975, was set aside and the Income-tax officer was directed to make a fresh assessment in respect of the assessment order in question, according to the guidelines laid down by the Commissioner in his order.
The Income-tax Officer then reassessed the petitioner for the assessment year in question and passed an order on August 21, 1979, by which the income-tax officer has found that a sum of Rs. 44,94,750 was refundable to the petitioner. Interest has been calculated on such amount for the period April 1, 1972, to March 10, 1975 (namely, the date of the original order of assessment) at 12 per cent. per annum.
On December 10, 1979, the petitioner received the notice under [SECTION] of the Act by which the Income-tax Officer has sought to rectify the order dated August 21, 1979, in so far as it related to the allowance of interest under [SECTION] of the Act. It is this order which is impugned in this proceeding.
The writ application was moved upon notice on August 19, 1980, and an interim order was passed to the effect that, if any order has been passed upon notice under [SECTION], the same would not be communicated to the petitioner. As it appeared from the record that no such order had in fact been passed on August 22, 1980. A further interim order was passed restraining the respondents from passing any final order.
The only dispute, according to the respondents, that could arise regarding the payment of interest under [SECTION] is whether the regular assessment was from the date of the original order passed on March 10, 1975, or the order passed on August 21, 1979. The respondents relied upon an order of the Supreme Court in [CASE NUMBER] - [PRECEDENT], by which the Supreme Court appears to have admitted a special leave petition where the question involved is the construction of the phrase "regular assessment".
As far as this High Court is concerned, there can be no doubt that the date of regular assessment is the date of the assessment subsequent to the order under [SECTION] of the Act (see [PRECEDENT] and [PRECEDENT]. This position has not been disputed by the respondents. However, the Income-tax authorities has in fact treated the original order of assessment, namely, March 10, 1975, as the date of regular assessment for the purpose of calculating interest under [SECTION]. It is, therefore, not understood how the income-tax authorities could at all be aggrieved by the order passed by the Income-tax Officer on August 21, 1979. If at all, it was a case where the petitioner might has entertained some grievance regarding the amount of interest calculated. The impugned notice has, therefore, been issued by the Income-tax Officer without any application of mind and is, accordingly, quashed. The rule is made absolute.
There will be no order as to costs.