9911796707
TMI Blog1986 (5) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23rd Sept., 1980. In this assessment order the ITO computed the tax payable by the assessee after giving credit to the advance-tax paid in the following manner: I. T. @ 60% Rs. 1,73,186 S.C. @ 5% Rs. 8,659 . Rs. 1,81,845 Less : Advance tax : . Paid on 16-6-1976—Rs. 8600 . Paid on 14-9-1976—Rs. 8,600 . Paid on 14-12-1976—Rs. 1,30,000 Rs. 1,47,200 . Rs. 34,645 Less : Paid on 17-12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder s. 214, in this assessment year as well as in the asst. yr. 1979-80 there was a further claim by the assessee that the interest should be paid up to the date of the refund and not up to the dates of regular assessment as stated by the ITO. 4. It is amply clear from the material on record that in the original assessment order dt. 23rd Sept., 1980 as well as in the revised order dt. 14th Jan. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R 871 (MP). The departmental representative was unable to oppose this contention but contended that the CIT (A) should have restored the original order of the ITO instead of directing the ITO to "treat the payment of Rs. 8,600 on 16th June, 1976 as payment for advance-tax for the purpose of grant of interest under s. 214." We find that the decision relied upon by the authorised representative for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. He contended that there is a conflict between the provisions of sub-ss. (1) and (2) of s. 214 of the Act and as such, the provision of sub-s. (1) thereof should be followed. This contention was opposed by the authorised representative for the assessee who relied on the decisions of Rayons Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Comp. Circle I (2), Madras & Anr. (1980) 19 CTR (Mad) 204 : (1980) 126 ITR 135 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19 up to the date of refund if the refund is made or has to be made after the regular assessment". On the strength of these two decisions we conclude that the CIT (A) was justified in directing the ITO to calculate and grant interest up to the date of refund instead of the date of regular assessment. So, the ground taken in both the appeals fails. 6. As a result, both the appeals are dismissed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
