9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1067X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rest expenses amounting to Rs.2,86,72,678/-." 3.1 Originally the assessment was completed u/s. 144 estimating the income on deposits with Bank. Before the CIT(A), the matter was agitated. During the remand proceedings, the Assessee made a claim of interest on the basis of the stand taken by the Custodian that the Assessee has to pay interest @ 18% per annum. Revenue being a party to the same, Assessee claimed such interest. Assessing Officer disallowed the same in the revised computation submitted to the ld. CIT(A). Following the decision in the case of Hitesh Mehta, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance. It was submitted that this issue was being set aside to the file of ld. CIT(A) in all the group cases for fresh adjudication. 3.2 In th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o.1 & 2 are allowed for statistical purpose." 3.3 Respectfully following the same, the issue is set aside to the file of CIT(A) to adjudicate the same according to the stand taken in other cases. Ground allowed for statistical purposes. 4. Ground No.4 is as under :- "4. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in confirming the levy of interest u/s. 234A and 234B of the Act." 4.1 Levy of interest was considered in the case of Hitesh Mehta in ITA No.1945/M/2012 dated 13/09/12 it was held as under :- "4.1 However, the ITAT in ITA No. 6810/Mum/2008 in M/s. Velvet Holdings Pvt. Ltd, a group case, while deciding a similar issue, has held as follows: "In other group cases, the ITAT held that interest u/s. 234B, 234C and 234D cannot be levied as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... June 2006.We accordingly answer the questions of law as framed in the negative. However, we clarify that it would be open to the notified person to seek a waiver or reduction by making an application to the chief commissioner of Income tax in terms of the order dated 26 June 2006 of the Central Board of Direct Taxes. The appeal is accordingly disposed of." 12.2 The ld. Counsel pointed out that the matter is referred to the same bench for reconsideration in the case of CIT vs. Cascade Holdings Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.3365 of 2010 dated 02/07/2013. As seen from the copy of the order placed on record, the above order was not stayed. Only the appeal was transferred to the same Bench for hearing. In these circumstances, we do not see any reason to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itional ground, the adjudication of which reads as under : "4. The Assessee has also filed an application dated 27.05.2010 for admitting the following ground:- "1. The ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that as per the decision of the Hon'ble Special Court dated 30.04.2010 in M.P. No. 41 of 1999, the assets under consideration and the consequential income belongs to Shri Harshad S. Mehta and hence, the income assessed by the Assessing Officer ought to have been taxed in the hands of Shri Harshad S. Mehta and not in the hands of the appellant." 5. After going through the addition ground filed by assessee, we noted that the ground is legal ground, which does not require any new facts to be brought on record. In view of the decision of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
