9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 629X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee. - Held that: - It is thus clear from the order dated 31.3.2008 that only limited issue was remitted by the Tribunal to CIT(A) and not the whole of the case. The assessee has been given liberty to adduce evidence. The Tribunal in the order dated 23.6.2009 has held that the order dated 31.3.2008 has been passed by the Tribunal on merit and the case has been remanded to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee through the applications under Section 254(2) is trying to get the order reviewed which is not permissible in law. - 64 of 2009 and 65 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 26-2-2010 - Mr.Justice R.B.Misra, Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Rohit Sood, Advocate with Mr. Vijay Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In the year 1998-99 an amount of Rs. 3,84,27,741/- and in the assessment year 1999- 2000 a sum of Rs. 4,06,58,901/- was provided. The Assessing Officer had disallowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that liability to pay the interest had not crystallized or accrued during the year of claim. The payment of interest was disputed liability of the assessee. 3. The CIT(A) in appeal remanded the issue to Assessing Officer with the direction to allow the interest on belated payment of royalty as it was compensatory in nature. The interest on interest is not permissible being penal in nature. The Assessing Officer was directed to verify as to whether interest at the rate of 16.5% on unpaid royalty relating to the audit paras had crystal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nded Section 250 and also earlier direction of the Tribunal vide which CIT (A) was directed to verify the claim of the assessee himself. 8. The Tribunal remanded the matter to CIT(A) with the direction to consider the claim of the assessee on the basis of evidence that may be produced by the assessee to establish that the liability to pay interest in respect of audit paras settled in assessment year 1997-98 had accrued during the relevant assessment years. In case necessary evidence is produced before CIT(A) to support the claim that interest on royalty, sales tax etc. with reference to audit paras had crystallized in the assessment year, the CIT(A) shall allow the claim of the assessee. The CIT(A) shall keep in mind earlier decision of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unds that detailed written submissions dated 3.12.2007 were not considered by the Tribunal. The department has accepted the order of the CIT (A) unconditionally pertaining to the assessment years 2000-2001 and 2001- 2002 under similar facts and circumstances. The grounds of appeal of the department before the Tribunal were vague. There was no challenge on account of allowance of provision of interest on the audit para of royalty settled by the assessee and allowed by the Assessing Officer in the assessment year 1997-98. In so far as the order dated 23.6.2009 is concerned, the grievance of the assessee is again that written submissions dated 3.12.2007 have not been considered and the Department had itself under similar facts and circumstance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
