As very short points are involved, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, we propose to deal with the application and the appeal together.
As far as the question of law raised in paragraph 7(c) of the petition is concerned, Mr. Khaitan submits and in our view correctly that the point has been decided by the tribunal in favour of the revenue, against which the assessee is proposing to file a section 260A appeal. So there is no way the revenue should be aggrieved by this part of the impugned order of the Tribunal.
The question in paragraphs 7(a), (d) and (e) of the petition do not on their face raise any question of law, let alone any substantial question of law. They concern facts only.
Therefore, we refuse to admit the appeal on the above questions.
As far as the question raised in paragraph 7(b) of the petition is concerned, we answer it by saying that imposition of interest is justified under sections 234B and 234C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, save and except on the income which arises from retrospective operation of any statute, decision etc. In those type of cases, the assessee is unable to know and assess his income and pay advance tax accordingly.
Hence this appeal (ITAT No. 161 of 2017) and the stay application (GA No. 1416 of 2017) are disposed of on the above terms.
Certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.