COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II V. GUJARAT HEAVY CHEMICALS LTD.

TAXAP/1010/2008

AI Insights

The case revolves around a tax appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax-II against Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd., concerning the application of interest under section 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, post the credit of MAT for the assessment year 2001-2002. The ITAT had previously ruled in favor of the assessee, which was challenged by the Revenue in the Gujarat High Court. The High Court, referencing a Supreme Court decision in Tulsyan Nec Ltd., upheld the ITAT's decision, dismissing the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 698972 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-12-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income Tax v. Tulsyan Nec Ltd. (2011) 330 ITR 226 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SWATI SOPARKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: MAUNA BHATT
• Keywords: Income tax appellate tribunal; Interest Charge; MAT credit; Substantial question of law
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

"O/TAXAP/1010/2008 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 1010 of 2008 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.D.KOTHARI ============================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ============================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II....Appellant(s) Versus GUJARAT HEAVY CHEMICALS LTD.....Opponent(s) ============================================= Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MRS SWATI SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ============================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.D.KOTHARI Date : 21/12/2013 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Page 1 of 3 O/TAXAP/1010/2008 JUDGMENT judgment and order dated 06.07.2007 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the ITAT) in ITA No.3360/Ahd/2003 for the assessment year 2001-2002, the Revenue has preferred the present tax appeal to consider the following substantial question of law: “Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming order passed by the CIT(A) directing the Assessing Officer to charge interest u/s. 234B after allowing credit of MAT?” 2. Heard Ms Bhatt, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Revenue and Shri Soparkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent – assessee. The only issue involved in the present appeal at the instance of the Revenue is in respect of levy of interest u/s. 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') after allowing the credit of MAT. 3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that while passing the impugned judgment and order, the learned ITAT has considered the order passed by the Tribunal in the assessee's own case but with respect to earlier assessment order which had attained the finality. 3.1. Even otherwise, now, the aforesaid issue/question is squarely covered against the Revenue by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Tulsyan Nec Ltd. reported in (2011) 330 ITR 226 (SC). It is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue that issue raised in the present Tax Appeal is squarely covered against the Revenue by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tulsyan Nec Ltd. (supra). 4. Applying the ratio and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Page 2 of 3 O/TAXAP/1010/2008 JUDGMENT Supreme Court in the case of Tulsyan Nec Ltd. (supra) to the facts of the case on hand, the issue/question raised in the present Tax Appeal is held against the revenue. Consequently, present Tax Appeal is dismissed. (M.R.SHAH, J.) (R.D.KOTHARI, J.) Jani Page 3 of 3 "