9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 359X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to the file of the AO with the same directions as given by the CIT(A) vide its order dated 31.8.2010 quoted above in the order. The AO is directed to pass a speaking order on this issue - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. Charging interest under section 234A - Held that:- In order under section 143(3) r.w.s. section 147 the AO inter alia ordered for charging interest under section 234A of the Act. Thus, the assessee was not correct in submitting that no interest under section 234A was originally levied by the AO, and the same was only levied for the first time in the order which was passed to grant effect to the order of the CIT(A). We, therefore, do not find any force in the ground of appeal, and accordingly, the same is dismissed.- Decided against assessee. Charging interest under section 234B - Held that:- Case of Freightship Consultants P. Ltd. Vs. ITO, (2007 (5) TMI 259 - ITAT DELHI-A) wherein it was held that it is mandatory for the AO to charge interest under section 234B of the Act and after the decision of the Tribunal, he was duty bound to increase or reduce the same as per the order of the Tribunal, the interest which he had charged while pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f ₹ 36,10,361/- on account of contribution to PF. 6. He further submitted that assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A) who deleted ₹ 18,88,427/- being employees' contribution towards PF vide order dated 31.8.2010 and sustained addition of ₹ 17,21,934/- being employees' contribution to PF, and simultaneously directed the AO to remove double disallowance of ₹ 34,43,865/- voluntarily added by the assessee in its return of income. He pointed out that in para.2.4 of the order, the CIT(A) has observed as under: As regards ground no 4, appellant claimed that it had already disallowed ₹ 34,43,868/- in original return filed but Assessing Officer again made disallowance resulting in double disallowance. This is a matter of verification. Assessing Officer is directed to verify the issue and remove any double disallowance if any. 7. However, he submitted that the AO passed order dtd.20.10.2010 giving effect to the order of the CIT(A) dated 31.8.2010 and allowed relief of ₹ 18,88,427/- only to the assessee. 8. The assessee had simultaneously filed appeal to the Tribunal against the addition of ₹ 17,21,934/- and the Tribunal ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO with the same directions as given by the CIT(A) vide its order dated 31.8.2010 quoted above in the order. The AO is directed to pass a speaking order on this issue after proper verification and after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Thus, this ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. 12. The ground no.3 of the assessee's appeal reads as under: 3. In law and on facts as well as in the circumstances of the case of the appellant, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in upholding interest charged under section 234A of the Act, without considering the facts in para 3 of the Statement of Facts, when no such interest is chargeable. The impugned interest under section 234A being bad in law, the same may be deleted. 13. The AR of the assessee submitted before us that since the original return was filed by due date on 26.11.2002, the interest was not charged while processing the return under section 143(1) on 10.10.2003 nor in the order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 dated 30.11.2007. Therefore, charging of such interest in the appeal effect order was wholly unwarranted. The AO declined to rectify the mistake, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, for the same reasoning, the order under section 143(3) for the year under appeal cannot be said to have been reached finality. However, the AO has recorded observations towards end of the order regarding interest charged under section 234B mechanically without application of mind and such observation is non-est in law. The CIT(A) has not considered the contention of the assessee through detailed statement of facts and has dismissed the ground of the appeal. 18. In the alternative, it is the submission of the assessee the AO passed appeal effect order charging interest under section 234B till the date of such appeal effect order. The AR relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Freightship Consultants (P) Ltd. vs. ITO (2008) 110 ITD 377 (Del) held that the interest under section 234B could be charged only upto the date of original assessment and not upto the date on which appeal effect is given. 19. We have heard rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and material available on record. In the instant case, the AO has charged interest under section 234B of the Act till the date of passing order giving effect to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
