appeal filed by assessee is directed against order of learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), on following grounds: '1. It may be declared that learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [Ld. CIT(A)] has erred in confirming order of Ld. Assessing Officer that income tax on interest is covered by word 'Income-tax' appearing in Clause (a) of Explanation to sub-section (2) of section 115JA of Income- tax Act, 1961. 2. It may be declared that income-tax is defined in section 2(43) of Income-tax Act, 1961 and said income-tax does not include any interest payable on such income-tax. 3. Ld. CIT(A) ought to have held that book profits under section 115JA does not include interest on income-tax. 4. It may be declared that book profits under section 115JA cannot be enhanced by including amount of interest on income-tax by resorting to section 154 of Income-tax Act, 1961. 5. quantum of income and tax thereon be reduced accordingly....' 2. assessee was engaged, during previous year relevant to assessment year under appeal, in business of mining, processing and export of mineral ores. assessee filed its return of income on 31-12-1999 based on accounts audited under Companies Act, 1956 together with report under section 44AB of Income-tax Act, declaring book profit at Rs. 24,47,610 under section 115JA of Act. said return was processed and intimation dated 14-2-2000 was issued under section 143(1) to assessee. assessee subsequently received notice under section 154 dated 15-1-2001 proposing to enhance book profit declared by assessee by disallowing interest paid on income-tax amounting to Rs. 8,85,217. assessee objected to rectification proposed in said notice on ground that interest on income-tax was not tax for purpose of Schedule VI to Companies Act, 1956 and as such, did not fall within ambit of clause (a) of Explanation to sub-section (2) of section 115JA. assessee also submitted before Assessing Officer that he did not have jurisdiction to alter book profit computed under provisions of Companies Act, 1956 which had also been adopted in audited accounts of assessee. Assessing Officer did not accept aforesaid plea of assessee and consequently enhanced book profit by Rs. 8,85,217 being interest paid on income-tax and demanded further tax of Rs. 92,946 vide his order dated 23-3-2001. 3. Aggrieved by aforesaid order, assessee preferred appeal before learned CIT(A). learned CIT(A) held that term 'income-tax' has not been defined in Income-tax Act though term 'tax' has been defined in section 2(43) of Act. According to him, it was commonly understood that income-tax included interest on income-tax also. In this view of matter, he confirmed order of Assessing Officer passed under section 154 with following observations: 'It is important to note that expression 'income-tax' has not been defined in Income-tax Act. word 'tax' has although been defined by section 2(43) of Income-tax Act. It is, however, commonly been understood that income-tax includes interest on income-tax. When liability towards income- tax is being considered interest on income-tax is always part of such liability. While computing income any income-tax including interest on income-tax debited to P&L A/c. is always added back for arriving at income chargeable to tax. In my opinion there is no ambiguity or any possibility of debate on this matter. I would, therefore, hold that interest on income-tax is part and parcel of income-tax and it is not possible to exclude interest portion which if excluded would give distorted meaning of expression 'income-tax'. factual issue is therefore, decided against appellant by upholding decision of Assessing Officer of increasing book profits by amount of interest on income-tax, while computing income under section 115JA. technical issue raised by appellant also has no merit because issue is not at debatable. No conflicting judgments on this issue have been brought to my notice. As stated earlier there is no scope for debate on issue, whether expression 'income tax' excludes interest on income-tax. action of Assessing Officer in rectifying mistake under section 154 of Income-tax Act is therefore not all incorrect. In other words mistake rectified by Assessing Officer is clear mistake apparent from records without involving any debatable issue. technical issue raised by appellant, also therefore, fails.' 4. In support of appeal, learned authorized representative for assessee reiterated submissions made before Departmental authorities. Inviting our attention to Explanation (a) to sub-section (2) of section 115JA she submitted that net profit, as shown in Profit & Loss Account for relevant previous year, was liable to be increased by amount of income-tax paid or payable, and provision made in that behalf. She submitted that term 'income-tax' used in said Explanation did not include interest on income-tax. According to her, distinction between income-tax, interest, penalty, fine, etc. was widely known. She contended that all aforesaid terms were not interchangeable and did not have same meaning. She argued that term 'income-tax' meant only income-tax and not interest on income-tax. learned authorized representative took us through provisions of sub-section (43) of section 2, which defines tax. She submitted that aforesaid definition made it amply clear that term 'tax' would mean only income-tax chargeable under provisions of Act. According to her term 'income-tax' used in said Explanation does not include interest on income-tax and hence rectification carried out by Assessing Officer was completely untenable in law. 5. In reply, learned Departmental Representative supported orders of Departmental authorities. 6. We have considered rival submissions. Section 115JA of Income-tax Act provides that where total income of assessee, being company, as computed under Income-tax Act is less than 30 per cent of its book profit, total income of such assessee chargeable to tax for relevant previous year shall be deemed to be amount equal to 30 per cent of such book profit. term 'book profit' has been defined in Explanation to sub- section (2) of section 115JA to mean net profit as shown in Profit & Loss Account for relevant previous year as increased, inter alia, by '(a) amount o f income-tax paid or payable, and provision therefor'. limited issue before us is whether term 'income-tax' as used in Explanation (a) to sub- section (2) of section 115JA includes interest on income-tax also. 7. term 'income-tax' has not statutorily been defined in Income-tax Act. It may, however, be relevant to notice provisions of section 4 of Income-tax Act which creates charge of income-tax. opening words of section 4, as they stood at relevant point of time, read thus: 'Where any Central Act enacts that income-tax shall be charged for any assessment year at any rate or rates, income-tax at that rate or those rates shall be charged for that year in accordance with, and subject to provisions including provisions for levy of additional income-tax of, this Act in respect of total income of previous year of every person'. In pursuance of aforesaid provisions, Finance Acts are enacted year after year to provide for rates at which income-tax is required to be charged in given assessment year. calculation and charge of income-tax is thus statutorily fixed by Finance Act. amount of 'income-tax' so fixed by Finance Act can neither be increased nor decreased by any other sum including interest, penalty, fine, etc. In other words, amount of 'income-tax' remains always statutorily fixed by rates specified in Part-I of First Schedule of Finance Act. It is, therefore, not possible to include amount of interest in 'income-tax' so fixed by section 2 of Finance Act, 1999 for assessment year under consideration. 8. terms 'income-tax', 'interest', 'penalty' and 'fine', as used in Income-tax Act, carry different meanings and connotations. In this connection, provisions of section 156 are quite relevant. According to section 156, where any tax, interest, penalty, fine or any other sum is payable in consequence of any order passed under Income-tax Act, Assessing Officer is required to serve upon assessee notice of demand in prescribed form specifying sum so payable. Two propositions clearly emerge from provisions of section 156. First proposition is that terms 'income-tax', 'interest', 'penalty' and 'fine' are neither inter-changeable nor overlap with each other in their meaning. Second proposition which emerges from section 156 is that phrase 'sum so payable' as used therein includes not only income-tax but also interest, penalty and fine or any other sum which is found to be payable in consequence of any order passed under Income-tax Act. provisions of section 156 of any order passed under Income-tax Act. provisions of section 156 clearly highlight fact that income-tax, interest, penalty, and fine are distinct terms and that term 'tax' does not include 'interest', 'penalty' and 'fine'. 9. As already mentioned above, 'income-tax' is charged under section 4 of Income-tax Act at rates specified in First Schedule to Finance Act. Interest is charged, on other hand, under provisions of sections 201, 234A, 234B and 234C of Income-tax Act. Thus, there are distinct provisions for charging income-tax and for charging interest. Secondly, while rates of income-tax can fluctuate depending upon provisions in Finance Act enacted for each assessment year, rate of interest continues to be fixed in terms of provisions of sections 201, 234A, 234B and 234C of Income-tax Act, 1961. Thirdly, income-tax is charged on income, whereas interest is charged as compensation for depriving State Exchequer of taxes that were legitimately due to it but were not paid. Thus, purpose for charging income-tax and interest is altogether different. Fourthly, while interest can be waived/reduced, income-tax cannot be reduced or waived by Income- tax authorities. These aspects make it amply clear that Income-tax Act maintains distinction between 'income-tax' and 'interest'. They are statutorily treated in different senses and hence 'interest' cannot be construed to be part of 'income-tax'. 10. above discussions make it equally clear that terms 'income- t x ' , 'interest' have assumed and acquired separate meanings and are understood distinctly and differently from each other. For this reason also, it is not possible to treat 'interest' as part of 'income-tax'. One of well recognized rules of interpretation is that where statutory language is plain and clear, task of interpretation can hardly be said to arise. first and foremost elementary rule of construction is that it is to be assumed that words and phrases of technical legislation like Income-tax Act are used in their technical meaning which they have acquired. As already mentioned above, term 'income-tax' is understood in altogether different sense than term 'interest'. It means income-tax which has been specified in Schedule I to Finance Act, 1999 and hence, its meaning cannot be artificially extended to include interest. In our humble view interest on income-tax clearly falls outside scope of term 'income-tax' as used in Explanation (a) to sub-section (2) of section 115JA. Wherever intention was to include interest, Legislature has specifically provided, as in section 156, for inclusion of interest in phrase 'sum payable'. No provision of law has been brought to our notice to show that term 'income-tax' has been defined to include 'interest' within its ambit. We are, therefore, unable to artificially extend scope of income-tax used in Explanation (a) to sub-section (2) of section 115JA so as to include 'interest on income-tax' also. 11. In view of above, appeal filed by assessee is allowed. *** SALGAOCAR MINING IND. (P) LTD. v. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX