9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble Supreme Court and the hon ble High Court which hold good till the subsequent decision of the hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Joint CIT v. Rolta India Ltd. [2011 (1) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. Therefore, prior to the decision of the hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Joint CIT v. Rolta India Ltd. [2011 (1) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] settled proposition of the law on the point was that no advance tax was payable on minimum alternate tax computed under section 115JB and accordingly, the interest under sections 234B and 234C cannot be levied for non-deposit of advance tax on minimum alternate tax for the year under consideration. Hence, we delete the levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C in this case. - Decided in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me-tax (Appeals) that at the relevant point of time there are various decisions including the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Kwality Biscuits Ltd. [2006] 284 ITR 434 (SC), wherein it has been held that no interest under sections 234B and 234C is leviable once the Income-tax is determined under section 115JB. The assessee has also relied upon the various decisions of the hon'ble High Courts including a decision of the hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Snowcem India Ltd. v. Deputy CIT [2009] 313 ITR 170 (Bom) as well as the decision of the hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Deputy CIT (Assessment) v. Associated Crown Closures P. Ltd. [2009] 315 ITR 291 (Guj). Placing the relia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the non-payment of advance tax of minimum alternate tax under sections 207 to 210 of the Income-tax Act would not attract the levy of interest under sections 234B and 234C of the Income-tax Act. The learned authorised representative has also relied upon the decision of the hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Binani Industries Ltd. v. CIT [2010] 329 ITR 323 (Cal) as well as the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Deepak Fertilisers and Petrochemicals Corporation Ltd. v. Deputy CIT [2008] 304 ITR (AT) 167 (Mum) and submitted that it has been held that the provisions of section 207 and onwards cannot be invoked for the purpose of computation of income under section 115J for the reason that the income would be computed only afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n it has been held that no advance minimum alternate tax was payable by the company. Therefore, the assessee had no reason to believe or foresee a subsequent decision fastening the liability of payment of advance tax. Even otherwise the decision in the case of Joint CIT v. Rolta India Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 470 (SC) is a subsequent decision and therefore, the impossibilities at the relevant point of time cannot be thrust upon the assessee. In the facts and circumstances as discussed above no fault can be found with the assessee in not depositing the advance tax of minimum alternate tax in view of the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court as well as various decisions of the hon'ble High Court. The assessee had the bona fide reason to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
