ITR No. 126 of 1990 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. ITR No. 126 of 1990 Date of decision. 17.12.2008. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Amritsar .....Petitioner Versus M/s. Partap Steel Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., Chheharta,Amritsar .....Respondent CORAM HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.N.MITTAL Present:- Ms. Nareender. P. K. Singh, Senior Standing Counsel for revenue. Mr. Rohit Sood, Advocate for the assessee. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J ( Oral ) This reference has been made by the Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar arising out of its order dated 30.1.1987 for the assessment year 1982-83 ITA No.522/ASR/1986 proposing to raise following substantial questions of law; “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner of income-tax ( Appeals), Amritsar allowing depreciation on Machinery @ 15% in respect of all the divisions except gases division ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals) cancelling the interest charged u/s 215 of the Income Tax Act, 1961?” We have dealt with question no.1 in case of assessee by separate order passed today in ITR No. 49 and 50 of 1990 and have left the ITR No. 126 of 1990 2 question no.1 open. For the same reasons question no.1 is left open. As regards question no.2, we find that the Tribunal set aside the levy of interest only on the ground that opportunity of hearing was not given to the assessee. It is not disputed that the said provision is mandatory and interest is in the nature of compensation and is leviable if advance tax paid was less than 75% of the assessed tax. Accordingly we answer question no.2 in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The reference is disposed of accordingly. ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge December 17, 2008 ( L. N. Mittal ) mamta Judge