9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (9) TMI 456 - HC - Income TaxInterest u/s.234B - whether interest should be charged on the amount after considering refund which was issued on passing intimation u/s.143(1)(a) of the I.T. Act? - Held that - In the present case, the assessee paid advance tax aggregating ₹ 9.00 Crores for the A.Y. 199495. There was a refund of ₹ 60,22,161/, after deducting the amounts of tax payable and TDS. The Assessing Officer issued intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act and the refund was worked out at ₹ 59,38,056/. For the said A.Y., the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was completed on 08.01.1997. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the case, we are of the opinion that the provision of Section 234D of the Act would not be applicable in this case since the assessment was completed in January 1997. The provision of Section 234D would have applied if the assessment had been completed after 01.06.2003. In our view, the issue on hand is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd. s case 2014 (2) TMI 1218 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT -. Hence, the Tribunal committed serious error in law in holding that interest u/s.234B should have been charged in the present case. - Decided in favour of the assessee
Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 234D regarding charging of interest on refund. 2. Applicability of Section 234B in the case of a taxpayer. Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 234D regarding charging of interest on refund: The case involved a Tax Appeal against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, raising the question of whether interest under Section 234B should be charged on the balance amount after considering a refund issued on passing intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The appellant, a public company engaged in manufacturing, argued that interest should not be charged on the refunded amount. The appellant's counsel cited a Supreme Court decision and a previous High Court decision to support their argument that Section 234D should not apply in this case as the assessment was completed before 01.06.2003. The High Court agreed with the appellant, stating that Section 234D would not be applicable as the assessment was completed in January 1997, well before the specified date of 01.06.2003. The Court found that the Tribunal erred in holding that interest under Section 234B should have been charged, ruling in favor of the appellant. Issue 2: Applicability of Section 234B in the case of a taxpayer: The Revenue argued that the assessee should pay interest under Section 234B based on the provisions of Section 143(4) of the Act. The Revenue's counsel referred to a High Court judgment and an Apex Court decision to support their position that interest under Section 234B is automatic when the conditions are met. However, the High Court distinguished the cases cited by the Revenue, stating that they were not directly applicable to the present case involving a refund issued under Section 143(1) of the Act. The Court concluded that the decisions relied upon by the Revenue did not support their argument in this particular scenario. Consequently, the Court ruled against the Revenue, stating that interest under Section 234B should not have been charged in the case at hand. In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that interest under Section 234B should not have been charged on the refunded amount. The Court found that Section 234D was not applicable in this case as the assessment was completed before the specified date. The judgment provided a detailed analysis of the legal provisions and previous decisions to support its conclusion, ultimately disposing of the appeal in favor of the assessee without any costs.
|
