Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad
Shankerlal Nebhumal (Huf) And Ors. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax on 27 March, 2001
Equivalent citations: (2003)80TTJ(AHD)69
ORDER
1. These ten appeals relating to the assessees of Shankerlal Nebhumal Uttamchandani group of Surat and their family members involve common issues and are, therefore, disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.
2. One of the main issues involved in ITA Nos. 4512, 4501, 4506, 4508, 4510, 4505 and 4513/Ahd/1991 is with regard to the additions made by the AO on account of alleged "or money" paid by these assessees for the purchase of shops in JJ Air-conditioned Market, Ring Road, Surat from M/s JJ Corporation, 50 per cent share of which was held by the members of Shankerlal Nebhumal Uttamchandani group. The amounts paid by these assessees for the purchase of shops at lower ground floor, upper ground floor and basemant in JJ Air Conditioned Market as per the books of accounts maintained by the assessees are given at p. 15 of the paper book filed by the assessee as under :
Shop No. Name of owner and source of payment Cheque No. Rupees Lower ground No. 135 Jivanlal Nebhumal (HUF) M/s Jivanlal Nebhumal 423532 2,00,000 Lower ground No. 136 Shankerlal Nebhumal (HUF) M/s Jivanlal Nebhumal 423533 2,00,000 Lower ground No. 137 Sureshkumar Nebhumal (HUF) M/s Jivanlal Nebhumal 423534 2,00,000 Upper ground No. 535 Maheshkumar Nebhumal (HUF) M/s Jivanlal Nebhumal 423535 1,75,000 Upper ground No. 536 Gopichand Nebhumal (HUF) M/s Jivanlal Nebhumal 423536 1,75,000 Basement No. 30 Arjunlal Nebhumal (HUF) M/s Jivanlal Nebhumal 423530 1,00,000 Basement No. 31 Arjunlal Nebhumal (HUF) M/s Jivanlal Nebhumal 423531 1,00,000 Basement No. 32 Arjunlal Nebhumal (Indl) M/s Arjunlal Nebhumal 634138 1,00,000
3. In ITA Nos. 4512, 4508 and 4510/Ahd/1991 the assessees have claimed to have purchased shop Nos. 136, 135 and 137, respectively at lower ground floor of JJ Air Conditioned Market for a sum of Rs. 2,00,000. The AO was, however, of the opinion that the market price of these shops was in fact Rs. 7,50,000 because M/s JJ Corporation has admitted in their assessment to have earned large unaccounted income by charging "on money" in respect of various shops constructed in the JJ Air-Conditioned Market at lower ground floor, upper ground floor and basement, etc. The AO, accordingly, held that in respect of the assessees mentioned in ITA Nos. 4512, 4508 and 45107And/1991, the assessees had paid "on money" of Rs. 5,50,000 over and above the amount of Rs. 2,00,000 which was paid by cheque by debit to the accounts of these assessees to M/s J.J. Corporation for the purchase of shop Nos. 136, 135 and 137 at lower ground floor.
4. In respect of the assessee in ITA No. 4501/Ahd/1991 the shop No. 536 was purchased at upper ground floor for which the assessee has claimed to have paid a sum of Rs. 1,75,000 only. However, the AO held that the market price of this shop was Rs. 4,50,000 and accordingly he held that the assessee must have paid a sum of Rs. 2,75,000 (Rs. 4,50,000--Rs. 1,75,000) out of his undisclosed income for which an addition was made in the case of this assessee.
5. In respect of the assessee in ITA No. 4506/Ahd/1991 the assessee has claimed to have purchased two shops Nos. 30 and 31 at the basement for which the assessee has paid Rs. 2,00,000. However, the AO on the basis of the report of the Valuation Officer held that the market price of the two shops in the basement was Rs. 4,09,000. He accordingly made an addition of Rs. 2,09,000 in the case of this assessee on account of "on money" paid in respect of two shops at basement.
6. In respect of the assessee in ITA No. 4505/Ahd/1991 the assessee has claimed to have purchased the shop No. 32 at basement for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000. The AO, however, held that the market price of this shop was Rs. 2,05,000 on the basis of the report of the DVO and as such the assessee must have paid "on money" of Rs. 1,05,000 over and above the purchase price debited in his account amounting to Rs. 1,00,000 which was paid by cheque by the assessee to M/s JJ Corporation. The AO accordingly made an addition of Rs. 1,05,000.
7. In respect of the assessee in ITA No. 4513/Ahd/1991 the assessee has claimed to have purchased shop No. 535 at upper ground floor for a sum of Rs. 1,75,000. The AO, however, held that the market price of this shop was Rs. 4,50,000. He, therefore, made an addition of Rs. 2,75,000.
8. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the additions of Rs. 5,50,000 made by the AO in respect of the assessees in ITA Nos. 4512, 4508 and 4510/Ahd.1991. However, in respect of assessees in ITA Nos. 4501, 4506, 4505 and 4513/Ahd/1991 the learned CIT(A) restored the issue with regard to the addition on account of alleged unexplained investment in the form of "on money" paid by these assessees to M/s JJ Corporation, for fresh adjudication in accordance with law to the file of the AO by passing orders in 1991.
9. Aggrieved with the orders of the CIT(A), the assessee have come in appeals before us. Shri K.H. Shah, the learned authorised representative of the assessees, pleaded that the AO has not brought any material on record to prove that the assessees involved in these appeals have in fact paid any "on money" over and above the price debited by these assessees in their respective books of accounts on account of purchase of these shops from M/s JJ Corporation. It was submitted that no doubt M/s JJ Corporation has charged "on money" in respect of certain shops belonging to it in the JJ Air-Conditioned Market to various other customers and this fact was admitted by M/s JJ Corporation during the course of search at their premises. But this alone will not be sufficient to hold that the assessees involved in these appeals have also paid "on money" to M/s JJ Corporation because admittedly the members of the assessees group were holding 50 per cent share in M/s JJ Corporation and there was absolutely no point in assessees having paid "on money" to a firm M/s JJ Corporation, 50 per cent share of which was controlled by their family members. Thus, it was pleaded that the whole additions on account of alleged unexplained investments by these assessees in the shops have been made on the basis of presumptions and surmises which is not at all justified.
10. In ITA Nos. 4501, 4506, 4505 and 4513/Ahd/199A the additions were made on the basis of estimate of market value of these shops by the Departmental Valuer and the learned first appellate authority had restored the issue with regard to the alleged unexplained investments in shops, to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in 1991. It was submitted by the learned authorised representative of the assessee that the CIT(A) ought to have deleted these additions as there was absolutely no evidence with the AO to prove that any "on money" has in fact been paid by these assessees to M/s JJ Corporation and the valuation done by the DVO only gives the market value on the valuation date but this does not necessarily mean that the assessees in these appeals have actually paid the amounts as estimated by the Departmental Valuer, particularly when the group of the assessees were having 50 per cent share in M/s JJ Corporation who is the seller of these shops.
11. The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the CIT(A) and pleaded that after the search proceedings M/s JJ Corporation had admitted the receipt of unaccounted "on money" running into crores of rupees on the basis of seized material and in fact several shops at the lower ground floor were admittedly sold by M/s JJ Corporation for Rs. 7,50,000. As such the Departmental authorities were justified in holding that M/s JJ Corporation must have charged similar amounts i.e., Rs. 7,50,000 from the assessees in ITA Nos. 4512, 4508 and 4510/Ahd/1991 and as such the AO as well as the CIT(A) were justified in making the additions of Rs. 5,50,000 in respect of these three assessees.
12. With regard to the other assessees where the matter was restored to the file of the AO, the learned Departmental Representative strongly relied on the orders of the CIT(A).
13. We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the orders passed by the AO as well as the CIT(A). The assessees involved in these appeals belonged to Uttamchandani family/group whose main business activity was dealing in cloth. Uttamchandani family/group joined with Tekrawala family to start the construction activity and both these families formed three partnership firms viz., M/s JJ Corporation, M/s Jashu Builders and M/s City Construction Co. wherein various members of both the families joined as partners but the interest of both the group in these firms was equal and accordingly the shares in profit and loss of the firms were decided. Thus Uttamchandani family has 50 per cent share in M/s JJ Corporation who constructed JJ Air-Conditioned Market and then earned income by selling shops in that market to various customers. It is undisputed that M/s JJ Corporation did charge ''on money" from the customers while selling the shops in the JJ Air-Conditioned Market and for that it made a disclosure during the course of search proceedings before the authorised officer and also subsequently while filing the return. However, the fact remains that the AO has not brought any material on record to indicate that the assessees involved in these appeals who admittedly belong to Uttamchandani family who is having 50 per cent share in M/s JJ Corporation, have in fact paid any "on money" to M/s JJ Corporation in respect of the shops purchased by them. The AO has made these additions presumably by invoking the provisions of Section 69B and as such the onus is on him to prove by evidence that the assessees have in fact paid any "on money" over and above the money which has been recorded in the books of account for making investments in the purchase of shops. Since no evidence has been brought on record by the AO in this regard, the additions made on account of alleged unexplained investments in the purchase of shops by alleged understatement of consideration cannot be sustained.
14. As regards ITA Nos. 4501, 4506, 4505 and 4513/Ahd/1991 the matter with regard to the additions made on account of alleged unexplained investments in the purchase of shops was set aside by the CIT(A) to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in 1991 and it is not known as to whether any fresh assessment has since been made by the AO in this regard. However, be as it may, on the basis of material available on record, the addition made by the AO is only on presumptions and surmises without supported by any evidence. Accordingly, the additions made on account of unexplained investments in the purchase of shops in the cases of all these assessees are directed to be deleted.
15. The other major issue involved in the appeals in ITA Nos. 4505, 4513, 4500, 4509 and 4511/Ahd/1991 is with regard to the addition made by the AO on account of low household expenditure shown in the books of accounts by these assessees which according to the AO were not sufficient to meet the household expenses of these assessees who have claimed before the AO that they were all living jointly along with Shri Shankerlal Nebhumal. The AO has discussed the issue of household expenses in detail in his order, dt. 22nd Feb., 1991, in the case of Shri Jivanlal Nebhumal (Indl) and he has, inter alia, observed as under :
"That all these assessees are living in Nanpura, a posh area of Surat City and there was a search in the residential premises of the assessee in the month of October, 1987, and a loose paper was found which indicated that the assessee has consumed 250 litres of milk in the months of February and March, 1983."
On the basis of the above seized paper the AO came to the conclusion that the assessee must be consuming at least 10 litres of milk per day and taking the cost of milk at Rs. 6 per litre of milk per day, he estimated the annual consumption of milk at Rs. 21,600. Taking this as the base the AO came to the conclusion that the annual expenses of all the family members of Shri Nebhumal who claimed to have been living jointly in a house at Nanpura are as under :
(1)Expenses for grains, pulses, veg. Oil, Panner, vegetables, etc. Rs.
For a family of 25 members, the monthly food expenses at the least will be Rs. 1,000 per person and total will be Rs. 1,000 x25x12 3,00,000 (2) Milk expenses :
For a family of 25 members having 11 children who at least require equal to 11 x 1/2 = 5.5 + 14 x 1/3 = 4.5 = 10 litres x Rs. 6 = 60 x 30 days x 12 months This working is in accordance with the seized papers.
21,600 (3) Electricity bill :
There are 25 members and 7 bedrooms therefore, monthly electric bill can safely expected to be Rs. 2,000 per month which comes to Rs. 24,000 24,000 (4) Taking school fees of children, Rickshow fees, tuition fees, etc. will be Rs. 3,000 per month for 11 school-going children and annual expenses will be Rs. 36,000 36,000 (5) Approximately medical expenses for 25 members is equal to Rs. 50 per person per month : 50 x 25 x 12 15,000 (6) Entertainment : If this is the house in which these people are living as discussed in this order which is true, then the monthly entertainment expenses of a family consisting of 25 members cannot be less than Rs. 5,000 in any case. This house enjoys facilities like colour TV, VCRs, stereo decks, and all other electric and electronic gadgets also. Therefore, annual expenses estimated will be Rs. 60,000 60,000 (7) Travelling and socialising of this family are again bound to be considerable since 25 family members cannot be travelling by ordinary modes of travel when their otherwise standard of living is so high. I estimate such expenses to be at least Rs. 100 per person per month. Such expenses on annual basis will be 30,000 (8) Expenses on religious festivals, social functions, attending marriages, etc. are also estimated to be.
25,000 (9) Clothing : To estimate the least a family which is leading a high living style is expected to spend at least Rs. 2,000 per person yearly. If taken in concrete terms this is very low since even a good silk saree costs Rs. 500 and figure of Rs. 2,000 is definitely on the lower side. Keeping this in view the annual expenses should not be less than 50,000 (10) Servants : The assessee vide letter dt. 8th Feb., 1991, stated that they are keeping only one maid servant. Looking to the standard of living and status of the family, this cannot be believed and in no case one maid servant can meet the needs of 25 members of a family. Since 6 families (brothers) are living together with their children each family must have kept their own servant and, therefore, taking the salary and other expenses of each servant at Rs. 1,000 per month total expenses on this head comes to 72,000 (11) Assessee having such standard of living is expected to have done colouring, painting, etc. of their house. Considering the cost of paints, Majuri rates, etc. this expenses for painting 7 bedrooms mansion cannot be less than Rs. 25,000 and the same is considered to have met from unaccounted source of the assessee. The same is added to the total.
25,000 Total 6,58,600
16. As against this, the assessee has debited only a sum of Rs. 1,88,000 in his books of account for household purposes which was considered to be very low. The AO accordingly made an addition of Rs. 6,58,600 on account of alleged unaccounted household expenses which were considered equally in the hands of six brothers who were living jointly and the AO made an addition of Rs. 1,09, 766 in the hands of each brother.
17. The assessee appealed and pleaded before the CIT(A) that the estimate made by the AO was wholly unjustified and is made on surmises and conjectures which has no relation to the actual realities. It was pleaded that all the family members numbering 25 were living jointly in a house at Nanpura and the details of the family members along with their ages and the number of minor children are as under :
Age Standard School
(i) Shri Jivanlal Self 45 Wife 44 Daughter Madhu 15 8 School Sons Hitendra 24 Business Harish 14 7 School Hemant 11 5 School
(ii) Shri Gopichand Self 40 Wife 37 Daughter Pinky 14 7 School Sons Nilesh 12 5 School Sushil 9 3 School
(iii) Shri Sankerlal Self 35 Wife 34 Sons Lokesh 9 3 School Hiren 7 1 School
(iv) Shri Arjunlal Self 33 Wife 31 Sons Ritesh 5 KG School Daughter Rima 8 3 School
(v) Shri Sureshbhai Self 29 Wife 26 Son Prashant 4 KG School
(vi) Shri Maheshbhai Self 27 Wife 25
(vii) Smt. Jatiben My mother 64
18. It was submitted that all these persons were staying together in their old and ancestral house at Timaliyawad, Nanpura, Surat, and that the house had only seven bedrooms and one hall and one kitchen and they had employed one maid servant only for cleaning of utensils and house. It was pleaded that the household expenses of the entire family were met out of total withdrawals of Rs. 1,88,000 made by various members of the group from their books of accounts. These withdrawals were in addition to the amounts withdrawn for payment of taxes, LIC premium and buying of valuables and durable household articles like TV set, Video, etc. It was pleaded that although the expenditure on milk estimated by the AO was quite reasonable as in fact the assessee's family was consuming 10 litres of milk per day being a family of vegetarian persons, the expenditure under the other heads was grossly estimated at much higher figure only on surmises and conjectures. It was pleaded that there was no basis for estimating the expenditure on servants at Rs. 72,000 when in fact the assessee family has employed one maid servant to whom they were paying only Rs. 300 per month along with one meal every day. Similarly, it was submitted that there was no basis for estimating the expenditure on colouring and painting of the house at Rs. 25,000 when in fact no such colouring and painting was done in the assessment year under consideration. It was further submitted that the expenditure estimated on clothing at Rs. 50,000 was also at a much higher scale because normally costly clothings are purchased only when there is a marriage or social function in the family and the AO has not brought on record any material to indicate that there was some marriage or important social function in the family of the assessee in the assessment year under consideration. Similarly, it was pleaded that the expenditure on account of entertainment, electricity, medical expenses, travelling and socialising expenses on religious festivals, etc. was estimated without any basis whatsoever. It was pleaded that even the estimate of expenditure on grains, pulses, vegetables, etc. at Rs. 1,000 per person per month was grossly exaggerated. It was further submitted that even after estimating the expenditure at a much higher and exaggerated figure at Rs. 6,58,600, the AO has chosen not to give credit of Rs. 1,88,000 which has been debited by the assessee in the books of accounts and has chosen to treat the entire estimated expenditure as having been incurred by the six brothers out of their income from undisclosed sources which is not at all justified.
19. The learned CIT(A) considered the submissions of the assessees and allowed partial relief to the assessees by holding that the household expenses of each of the six families which were living jointly can be estimated at Rs. 8,000 per month, Thus, according to the CIT(A) the total household expenses of six families who are living jointly were Rs, 8,000 x 12 x 6 = Rs. 5,76,000. The learned CIT(A) further held that since these have withdrawn a sum of Rs. 1,88,000 by debit to the accounts of various members of the family out of which Rs. 1,50,000 could be considered for household purposes, the assessees of this group must have spent at least Rs. 4,26,000 (Rs. 5,76,000 - Rs. 1,50,000) out of their income from undisclosed sources. The learned CIT(A) accordingly sustained an addition of Rs. 71,000 (Rs. 4,26,000 divided by 6 = 71,000) in respect of each of the assessee out of which five are in appeals before us and the 6th one's appeal is stated to be pending before the learned first appellate authority.
20. Before us, the learned authorised representative of the assessees pleaded that the AO as well as the CIT(A) were not justified in making addition on account of alleged low household expenses without bringing any material on record to prove that the assessees have in fact incurred any unexplained expenditure in the assessment year under consideration. It was pleaded that all the 25 members of six families are regularly assessed to tax and as such there was no basis for making additions only in the hands of six adult members heading each of the families who were all living jointly. It was submitted that the only basis adopted by the AO was one milk bill found during the course of search over which there was no specific mention of the name of the family. It was submitted that even assuming though not admitting that the assessee was in fact consuming on an average 10 litres of milk per day on the basis of milk bill found during the search, there is absolutely no basis for estimating the other items of household expenses as done by the AO. It was further submitted that the CIT(A) also has without any basis estimated the household expenses of each of the six families at Rs. 8,000 per month. It was further submitted that all valuable things found in the house including TV set, refrigerator, etc. were separately accounted for by debiting in the books and as such the estimate of household expenses made by the CIT(A) at Rs. 8,000 per month for each of the families was at a much higher side. It was pleaded that out of 25 members, 12 were school--going children; out of which two girls were studying in 7th and 8th standard and that there was no school fee as the education of girls is free in the State of Gujarat. Five studying children in the 5th standard were going to school on bicycle and the other two studying in KG were being dropped to the school by lady members of the family as the schools were adjoining to the residence. Only two children were going to school by Rickshaw who used to charge Rs. 40 per child per month. Accordingly, it was submitted that the estimate on school fees, etc. at Rs. 36,000 by the AO was at a much higher scale. Accordingly, it was submitted that since there was no material except a milk bill found during the search, the AO was not justified in making any addition on account of alleged low household expenses and even the CIT(A) was in error in estimating the household expenses of each of the six families who were living jointly, at Rs. 8,000 per month for which there was no evidence brought on record by the Departmental authorities. He accordingly submitted that the addition sustained by the CIT(A) at Rs. 71,000 in each of these five assessee's case is required to be deleted.
21. The learned Departmental Representative strongly supported the orders of the AO as well as the CIT(A). It was submitted that the assessees group is one of the richest family of Surat and although they were living jointly, yet, taking into consideration the income carried by the group, the household expenses shown in the books of account were grossly inadequate for a family of 25 persons even though they were living together. It was pleaded that the CIT(A) was more than reasonable in allowing partial relief to the assessees by sustaining the addition to Rs. 71,000 in the hands of each of the five assessees involved in these appeals and no further relief is required to be given to these assessees.
22. We have considered the rival submissions and have also gone through the order passed by the AO as well as the CIT(A) in the case of Shri Jivanlal Nebhumal (Indl.) whose appeal is still stated to be pending before the CIT(A) but on the basis of whose order (which is a speaking order) the additions were made in the cases of these five assessees whose appeals are before us. The CIT(A) has allowed partial relief to the assessees by estimating the household expenses of each of the families of six brothers at Rs. 8,000 per month. It is undisputed that the only evidence found during the search was a milk bill for the months of February and March, 1983, which indicated that the assessee has consumed 250 litres of milk in those two months. It is not known as to whether there was any social or religious function in the families of assessees in those two months. However, the assessees during the course of hearing before the AO, the CIT(A) or even before us has hesitatingly admitted that the assessee-family might be consuming about 10 litres of milk per day. However, as far as the estimate of household expenses under the other heads made by the AO are concerned, we are of the opinion that those estimate are not supported by any evidence/material brought on record. Similarly, the estimate of the CIT(A) at Rs. 8,000 per month per family of six brothers is also without any basis. However, the fact remains that the total expenditure debited in the accounts of all the 25 members (including minors) who are claimed to be living jointly is only Rs. 1,88,000 which in our considered opinion is rather low and not quite adequate to meet day-to-day household expenses on food, clothing any other daily needs of a family of the status of the assessee. Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that it will be fair and reasonable to sustain an addition of Rs. 20,000 as against Rs. 71,000 sustained by the CIT(A) in respect of all the five assessees who are in appeals before us.
23. There is one more additional ground of appeal in all the appeals with regard to charging of interest under Section 139(8)/215. It was submitted by the learned authorised representative of the assessees that such charging of interest is void ab initio and bad in law as the AO has not granted any opportunity to the assessees before charging such interest in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of S. Govindaraju v. CIT (1982) 138 ITR 495 (Kar) and the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Ambica Chemical Products v. ITO (1991) 191 ITR 382 (AP). It was pleaded that since there is no contradictory decision of the jurisdictional High Court on this issue, the Tribunal may allow the ground of the assessees and direct the AO to delete the interest charged under Section 139(8)/215. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, opposed the admission of additional ground and also submitted that the interest charged under Section 139(B)/215 is only compensatory in nature for which no specific order is required.
24. We have considered the rival submissions. As far as admission of additional ground is concerned, this being a purely legal issue, the ground can be admitted in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 383 (SC).
25. As far as the question with regard to the charging of interest under Section 139(8)7215 is concerned, Rules 40 and 117A of the IT Rules, 1962, gave discretion to the AO to waive or reduce interest levied under Sections 139, 215 and 217 of the IT Act, 1961, under certain circumstances. By implication, these rules require that an opportunity must be given to the assessee to show-cause why interest should not be levied or to satisfy the AO that there is a case for waiver or reduction of interest. Admittedly in these cases no such opportunity was given by the AO to the assessees. Accordingly, the orders levying interest under Section 139(8)7215 are not justified. However, in such a situation can the levy of interest be quashed or the matter is required to be restored to the file of the AO with the direction that he should allow an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and then consider the case of the assessee in terms of Rules 40 and 117A of the IT Rules, 1962. In these cases it will be useful to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Ambica Chemical Products v. ITO (supra) relied upon by the learned authorised representative of the assessee wherein the Hon'ble High Court held as under :
"These writ petitions are filed against the orders of the ITO levying interest under Sections 139 and 258 (sic) of the IT Act. The grievance of the petitioners is that the interest was levied without giving them any opportunity. Under Rules 40 and 117A of the IT Rules, 1962, framed under the IT Act, the ITO is vested with discretion to waive or reduce interest under certain circumstances. By implication, these rules require that an opportunity must be given to the assessee to show cause why interest should not be levied or to satisfy the ITO that there is a case for waiver or reduction. In these cases, no opportunity was given. We, therefore, quash the orders to the extent of interest only. We give fifteen days' time from today to the petitioners to file representations before the concerned officers. No further notice need be issued by the ITO. The ITO shall consider the representations after giving a personal hearing to the petitioners and pass fresh orders in accordance with law. In all other respects, the impugned orders stand. With this direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs."
[Empahsis, italicised in print, supplied] From the above, it is clear that although in the writ petitions filed by the assessees the levy of interest under Section 139 and 215 was quashed, yet, the Hon'ble High Court gave fifteen days' time to the petitioners to file representations before the concerned officers to be disposed of in accordance with law. In this view of the matter, we restore the question with regard to the levy of interest under Section 139(8)7215 to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after giving opportunity to the assessee and also taking into consideration the latest decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT and Ors. v. Ranchi Club Ltd. which though given in the context of Sections 234A, 234B and 234C, will have bearing on the question of levy of interest under Section 1397(8)7215 also.
26. In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed.