9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1078X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he interest on refund was not allowed u/s 244. The Hon ble High Court held that the order passed by the ITO giving effect to the decision of appellate authority is as much an assessment order as the one passed by him by way of regular assessment u/s 143 of the Act. As held that in the absence of specific right of appeal conferred by S.246, no appeal lies to the appellate authority against refusal to grant interest, but where there is total denial of liability to pay interest, the order is liable to be challenged in an appeal although there can be no appeal if dispute is only regarding the quantum of interest payable. There is a distinction between the principle of law, i.e. where there is total denial of assessee s claim, it is open to h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. Both are assessee s appeals for A.Y. 1993-94 and 1994-95 respectively against individual orders of the Ld.CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad dated 4.5.2018 for both the A.Ys. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, carrying on money lending business and trading in shares and securities, during the F.Yrs relevant to A.Yrs 1990-91 to 1995-96. There was a search and seizure operation in his case on 4.9.1994 and a declaration was made u/s 132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and the assessee opted to pay taxes out of the proceeds from the sale of seized shares and securities. Consequently, the assessee filed an application before the Settl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 1995 and the AO gave credit of the same for A.Y. 1991-92 to 1994-95 and assessee objected to giving credit to AY 1991-92 to 1994-95. He observed that according to assessee ₹ 42 lakhs paid was for AY 1995-96 and the assessee had filed appeal before the CIT(A) who after getting remand report from the AO dated 21.11.2002 found that on the date of payment of ₹ 42 lakhs, there was no demand outstanding pertaining to any A.Y. and no amount was due as per return filed. In view of this categorical finding of CIT(A) that the amount of ₹ 42 lakhs paid by assessee need to be given credit for AY 1995-96, the Tribunal held that this amount paid by assessee in advance, has to be treated as advance tax for A.Y. 1995-96. The Tribunal t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y limitation. The Tribunal accordingly set aside orders of the lower authorities. The AO passed consequential order dated 22.6.2010 by adjusting the sum of ₹ 42 lakhs towards the outstanding demand for AY 1995-96 and recomputing interest u/s 220(2) of the Act. 2.2. Aggrieved by this consequential order, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who directed the AO to follow the directions of Hon ble ITAT by not giving double credit and by not waiving interest levied u/s 234A, B and C of the Act. Consequent to the order of CIT(A), the AO passed consequential order dt. 22.6.2010 against charging interest u/s 220(2) of the Act and against this order assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), who dismissed the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al placed on record, we find that the interest u/s 220(2) which has been charged in the initial consequential order passed by the AO has been waived by the CIT(A)-V, Hyderabad. Subsequently, pursuant to directions of ITAT to treat the advance amount paid by assessee, as advance tax for the A.Y. 1995-96, the AO has passed the consequential order. We find that in the case of Bakelite Hylam Ltd. (supra), the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court was considering the case of an assessee wherein while giving effect to the order of the ACIT in the quantum appeal, the interest on refund was not allowed u/s 244 of the Act. The Hon ble High Court held that the order passed by the ITO giving effect to the decision of appellate authority is as much an asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the liability to pay interest, the order is liable to be challenged in an appeal although there can be no appeal if the dispute is only regarding the quantum of interest payable. There is a distinction where, on principle of law, there is a total denial of the assessee s claim, it is open to him to show that the claim for interest is well founded. If however, on principle, there was no objection to the grant of interest but the dispute related only to the quantum, then the assessee has no right of appeal against the order on the ground that interest was inadequately granted. The Tribunal granted certain reliefs to the assessee and in giving effect to the Tribunal s order, the Income tax Officer passed a modification order g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
