9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1023X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be excluded from the period for which interest is payable. Statue also indicates that, if any question arises as to the period to be excluded, it has to be decided by the Principal Chief Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner. Under what all circumstances can such an eventuality arise is a matter to be considered by a competent authority. Once the competent authority had taken such a decision, this Court, in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India will not go into the merits of the contention, unless the decision is illegal or perverse. Each case has to be decided on its own facts. In CIT, Thiruvananthapuram v State Bank of Travancore (2014 (1) TMI 25 - KERALA HIGH COURT), the Division Bench was considering a case in wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee for correcting the TDS certificates. It was held at paragraph 4 as under. 4. As per the decisions referred to above, once the credit for TDS given, automatically logical consequence is determination of interest on the tax credit. Similarly the authorities below opined that the interest cannot be denied for the time taken by the appellant assessee to cure the defects in the TDS certificates as no amount is due from the assessee so far as TDS certificates and the amount was lying with the revenue. The interest is payable on account of the amount in excess of what is payable was remaining with the revenue and not for the delay caused by the revenue in determining the refund of the amount. In that view of the matter as the exces ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ificates cannot be a reason which could be attributable to the assessee. 4. Based on the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, this Court had taken note of the fact that the delay was substantial and when the statute clearly specifies that the interest need not be paid if the proceedings of refund is delayed for reasons attributable to the assessee, and the respondents having refused interest on the basis of a factual finding placing reliance on a statutory provision, there is no reason to interfere in the said direction. The question to be considered is whether the judgment referred above is to be applied to the facts of the present case. 5. Commissioner of Income-tax, Thiruvananthapuram v State Bank of Travancore (supra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of India will not go into the merits of the contention, unless the decision is illegal or perverse. Each case has to be decided on its own facts. 7. In CIT, Thiruvananthapuram v State Bank of Travancore (supra), the Division Bench was considering a case in which interest was directed to be paid by the Commissioner of Income Tax, which was confirmed by the Tribunal. The said case rests on its own facts. In the present case, the Commissioner of Income Tax had denied the grant of interest on specific grounds which had been indicated in the order itself and it was after arriving at a conclusion that such a power is vested with the Commissioner, that this Court had upheld the view expressed by the Commissioner. 8. In the said circumsta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
