9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (2) TMI 1360 - AT - Income TaxMaintainability of appeal - payment of admitted tax - whether admitted tax includes interest? - Held that - The explanation of assessed tax as per the provisions of Section 140(1B) does not include the component of interest at all. The Provisions of Sub-section 1B also specifically says that interest payable u/s. 234B shall be computed on an amount equal to the assessed tax or as the case may be on the amount by which the advance tax paid falls short of the assessed tax . The words admitted tax and assessed tax in the context of Income Tax Act always refers to the tax component and does not include any interest or penalty which are levied separately and also specifically stated wherever they occur. In view of that, respectfully following the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Manoj Kumar Beriwal (2008 (6) TMI 204 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT), we hold that the order of CIT(A) cannot be sustained. As assessee has paid the admitted tax, the appeal is maintainable before the CIT(A).
Issues:
1. Delay in filing the appeal and condonation of the delay. 2. Disallowance of expenditure claims and taxation of share of consideration. 3. Interpretation of provisions of Section 249(4) regarding payment of admitted tax for admission of an appeal. 4. Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) based on non-payment of interest along with admitted tax. 5. Whether admitted tax includes interest as per Section 249(4) and Section 140A. 6. Jurisdiction of CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal in limine. Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal and condonation of the delay: The appeal was filed with a delay of 19 days, and the delay was condoned by the ITAT after considering the reasons provided by the assessee and the arguments presented. Issue 2: Disallowance of expenditure claims and taxation of share of consideration: The AO disallowed expenditure claims and taxed the share of consideration received from a company in the assessment. The appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed, leading to further appeals and reconsideration of the case. Issue 3: Interpretation of provisions of Section 249(4) regarding payment of admitted tax: The ITAT directed the CIT(A) to consider the issue of payment of admitted tax for admission of an appeal. The ITAT emphasized that the payment of admitted tax is a mandatory condition for appeal admission and should not include interest. Issue 4: Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) based on non-payment of interest: The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal again, citing non-payment of interest along with admitted tax. The appellant argued that only admitted tax was required to be paid, and the CIT(A) should have considered the case on merits. Issue 5: Whether admitted tax includes interest as per Section 249(4) and Section 140A: The ITAT clarified that 'admitted tax' does not include interest, as per Section 249(4). The CIT(A)'s decision was overturned based on this interpretation, and the appeal was restored for consideration on its merits. Issue 6: Jurisdiction of CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal in limine: The CIT(A) exceeded jurisdiction by dismissing the appeal based on non-payment of further interest, which was not clearly defined or calculated. The ITAT emphasized that the appeal should have been decided on its merits and not dismissed based on technicalities. In conclusion, the ITAT Hyderabad clarified the interpretation of provisions related to the payment of admitted tax for appeal admission, emphasizing that interest is not included in the definition of admitted tax. The CIT(A) was directed to consider the appeal on its merits, and the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering appeals based on substantive issues rather than technicalities.
|
