9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ging interest under Section 234B and 234C – ITAT is a rectification order upheld the order passed by CIT(A). Held that: We find no infirmity in the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No substantial question of law arises for our consideration. – revenue appeal dimissed. - ITA 693/2010 - - - Dated:- 4-5-2010 - Advocates who appeared in this case:- For the Appellant: Mr Abhishek Maratha For the Respondent: None CORAM:- Hon'ble Mr Justice Badar Durrez Ahmed Hon'ble Mr Justice V.K. Jain 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest? BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) CM 8208/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said Act before the Assessing Officer. 5. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) decided in favour of the assessee and directed the Assessing Officer to allow MAT credit before charging interest under Section 234B and 234C of the said Act. The revenue, being aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, which came up for hearing on 09.08.2007. By virtue of the said order, the Tribunal upheld the rejection of the application under Section 154 of the said Act moved by the assessee before the Assessing Officer and allowed the appeal of the revenue. 6. Subsequently, a miscellaneous application was filed by the assessee for recall of the above order which was an ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the Assessing Officer charged interest of Rs 18,92,824/- under Section 234B and Rs 7,31,453/- under Section 234C. Because the Assessing Officer had charged the interest under Section 234B and 234C, the assessee filed objections by virtue of a letter dated 18.11.2004, requesting the Assessing Officer to delete the levy of interest since, according to the assessee, the tax payable was less than the assessed tax. The said application was regarded as an application under Section 154. The Assessing Officer rejected the said application. However, the assessee's appeal from the said rejection was allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), as indicated above. 9. As mentioned above, the Tribunal, in the first round, allowed the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal observed that on the earlier occasion, the Tribunal had proceeded on the assumption that it was the assessee who had first made an application to the Assessing Officer for rectification of the intimation on the footing that the MAT credit should be taken into account before levying interest under Section 234B and 234C. However, the Tribunal noted that the sequence of events, starting from the issuance of the intimation under Section 143(1) and the issuance of the notice under Section 154 by the Assessing Officer and the passing of the order under Section 154 on 25.10.2004 clearly were not brought to the notice of the Tribunal in the first round. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that by passing the order dated 25.10.2004 under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
