2005 (8) TMI 83

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) deleting the interest of Rs. 1,60,105 levied under section 201(lA) of the Act?" The facts are not in dispute that as and when the amount is paid, the tax has been deducted and that has been paid to the Department. The Tribunal has considered this aspect in paras. 6 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the recipient on such income it may not be justified to recover the said amount of tax, but so far as the liability of interest is concerned, that cannot be considered to be non-existent on account of deposit of tax by the recipient at a subsequent or later stage. It was also held by the hon'ble Rajasthan High Court at page 101 in the case of CIT. v. Rathi Gum Industries [1995] 213 ITR 98 that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nterest on the assessee as the amount which was payable to the Revenue had been duly paid. 7. After perusal of the facts of the case and relevant law as on the subject, we are of the opinion that learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) had rightly held that interest under section 201(lA) of the Act was to be deleted after due verification by the Assessing Officer from the enclosures with sup .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X