9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1264X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come Tax vs Arun Kapoor [2010 (7) TMI 610 - Punjab and Haryana High Court] - On request for adjustment of advance tax liability against seized cash, the assessee is liable to pay interest u/s 234B and 234C - The assessee is also entitled to get benefit of payment of advance tax out of seized cash from the date of making application for adjustment of seized cash as advance tax towards tax liability – Decided against Revenue. - I.T.A.No.5242/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 7-2-2013 - Shri S. V. Mehrotra And Shri Chandra Mohan Garg,JJ. For the Appellant : Smt. Priya Sahu, DR For the Respondent : Shri Amit Goel ORDER Per Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial Member This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 34C of the Act amounting to Rs. 52,44,393/- and Rs. 12,61,153/- respectively. The appellant company filed an application dated 11.02.2010 u/s 154 of the Act before the Assessing Officer requesting him to rectify the intimation passed under section 143( 1) of the Act for giving credit of the aforesaid cash amounting to Rs. 3,86,11,0001- treating the same as advance tax paid by the appellant company. The Assessing Officer, however, vide order dated 08.03.2010 passed u/s 154 I 143(1) of the Act, rejected the application filed by the appellant company. The Assessing Officer held that the cash seized during the search operations could not be treated as advance tax paid by the appellant company." 4. The Assessing Officer rejected the above subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by treating the amount of Rs. 3,86,11,000/- as advance tax w.e.f. 24.03.2008 i.e. the date when the appellant requested the Assessing Officer to treat the amount as advance tax." 6. On careful consideration of the submissions of both the parties and facts and circumstances of the case, we observe that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs K.K. Marketing (2005) 278 ITR 590 has held that seizure of cash belonging to the assessee firm could be adjusted against its advance tax liability since there is a request by the assessee to adjust the seized cash against the advance payment of tax and in the subsequent assessment proceedings, the same should be treated as advance tax and interest can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
