9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... als). In the present M.P. also the assessee has not made out any case that the decision of the learned CIT (Appeals) and the impugned order of the Tribunal are on facts, which are wrongly considered. In view of the facts of the matter as discussed above and the clear findings recorded no merit in the contentions made by the assessee in the present M.P. In our view, a clear finding has been rendered on all issues under appeal, based on an evaluation of the facts emanating from the submissions made, before the learned CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal and the material on record. Seeking re-evaluation of the facts or to make fresh submissions on the same set of issues and facts amount to seeking a review of the impugned order, which is beyond the scope of the M.P. The issue in the case on hand is whether the assessee has made out any case of mistake apparent from the records, to warrant interference under Section 254(2) of the Act. For the reasons discussed above, we are very clear that the assessee has not pointed out any mistake apparent from the record - Decided against assessee. - M.P. No.75/Bang/2015 - - - Dated:- 24-9-2015 - SHRI VIJAYPAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bhai B Shah Vs. ITO reported in (2013) 31 TAxmann.com 34 were squarely applicable to the facts of the case which would have been followed by the learned Assessing Officer. 5. For these and other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal, the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed. 3.2 The Tribunal vide order in ITA No.297/Bang/2014 dt.23.1.2015 dismissed the assessee's appeal. It is against this order of the Tribunal that the assessee has preferred the present M.P. , seeking rectification of the order of the Tribunal by accepting the interest calculation under Section 234A of the Act as submitted by the assessee to the authorities concerned. 3.3 From a perusal of the contents of the M.P., it is the contention of the assessee that :- i) interest under Section 234A of the Act is chargeable after reducing the amount of tax paid by the assessee upto the due date of filing of the return of income; ii) in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT V Pranoy Roy Another in 309ITR 231 (SC), interest under Section 234 of the Act is payable only on the amount of tax that has not been deposited before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... geable under Section 234A and 234B of the Act, as per the assessee's calculation at ₹ 34,116 and ₹ 4,99,921 respectively visa- vis that of the Assessing Officer, at ₹ 2,86,932 and ₹ 5,51,822 respectively, has been addressed by the learned CIT(A) in the impugned order. We also find that the learned CIT(A) in the impugned order has also considered and distinguished the judicial decisions cited by the assessee, i.e. Prannoy Roy (supra) and Bharatbhai B Shah (supra). The operative portion of the impugned order is extracted hereunder : 1.2 As the appellant was aggrieved by the interest levied under Section 234A and 234B, he applied for rectification of the same under Section 154 of the Act vide letter dt.15.12.2011 but the Assessing Officer in his order under Section 154 of the Act dt.18.5.2012 rejected the appellant s application. In the appeal filed against the assessment / rectification order so made, the appellant is not agitating the quantum of income assessed but is questioning the amount of interest levied under Section 234A and 234B of the Act. ; the appellant s ground is that interest under Section 234A is not leviable on the amount of tax pai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (supra). At the outset, the decision is given by Gujarat High Court which is not the jurisdictional High Court. That apart, even in this case the assessee has paid taxes before due date though belatedly filed the return of income. In the present case, however the assessee has both paid the taxes and filed return belatedly which makes both decisions in-operational for assessee. In this context, it is relevant to mention that a detailed working of the tax computation given by the Assessing Officer dt.5.7.2013 and 17.10.2013 was provided to the assessee as an opportunity of being heard. On 11.11.2013, the assessee filed his written submissions wherein he has annexed a computation as per SC s decision in the case of Prannoy Roy (supra). I have already held vide para that the said case being factually different cannot be applied to the present assessee. As regards assessee's contention at para 4 of the written submission regarding the working of interest, I find the Assessing Officer s working to be correct on the following grounds : (i) The Act under Section 234A(1) provides for giving credit to Advance Tax paid and tax deducted / collected at source. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d an occasion to deliberate on the levy of interest under Section 234A/234B/234C. Their wisdoms are found as below : We will have to examine the character of interest payable under the provisions of section 234A, 234B and 234C. A perusal of these sections shows that the interest for default in furnishing return of income, default in payment of advance tax and interest for deferment of advance tax are mandatory in nature. 4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 6.3.2 From a perusal of the operative portion of the impugned order extracted above (supra), the grounds raised and arguments put forth in this appeal, it is clear that the learned CIT(A) in the impugned order has addressed both the issues of excessive calculation of charge of interest under Section 234A and 234B of the Act, as well as by distinguishing the judicial pronouncements relied on by the assessee, before dismissing the assessee's appeal. Before us, except for reiterating the contentions that the interest charged under Section 234A and 234B of the Act was excessive and that the same two judicial decisions in the case of Prannoy Roy (supra) and Bharatbhai B Shah (supra) were applicable to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
