2021 (8) TMI 922

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s against the order of Ld. CIT(A) whereby the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the action of the AO in granting short interest under section 244A of the Act and also not directing the AO to adjust the refund granted first towards the interest receivable and the balance remaining against the tax amount receivable by the assessee. The assessee has also challenged the order of Ld. CIT(A) on the issue of holding that the issue is debatable and can not be rectified under section 154 of the Act. 3. The facts in brief are that in terms of order dated 20.07.2011 passed under section 154 of the Act, the AO determined the amount of Rs. 2,98,529/- as refundable to the assessee. Against the said order, the assessee moved another rectification application under s .....

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 order of rectification order dated 21.05.2018, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) submitting that order passed by the AO is bad in law as the same is against the ratio laid in the decision of co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of UOI vs. ACIT (2016) 72 taxmann.com 348 wherein it has been held that refund granted should be adjusted first against interest component of earlier refund and thereafter balance amount should be adjusted against principal component of tax in the refund granted earlier. The assessee also distinguished the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gujarat Fluro Chemicals (supra) on the ground that said decision deals with the issue of interest on interest whereas assessee has not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... at Flouro Chemicals (supra) has been considered in the aforementioned decisions. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Grasim Industries Ltd. v/s. DCIT reported in [2021] 123 taxmann.com 312 wherein the same view was taken. In view of the above, the ld AR submitted that the view canvassed by the appellant is supported by several rulings of the Tribunal referred above and hence and hence, the issue cannot be regarded as being debatable In nature as held by the CIT(A). The Ld. A.R. prayed before the Bench that in view of the foregoing judicial pronouncements, the AO may be directed to adjust the amount of refund first against interest receivable u/s. 244A of the Act and thereafter the balance amount aga .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X