DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata, Kolkata V. M/s. ITC Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1294/KOL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 129423514 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 1999-2000
• Appeal Filed On: 03-10-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANJAN PD ROY LD
• Assessee Lawyers: BISHAN SEAL LD
• Keywords: Assessment record

Judgement Text

, A , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH- A CALCUTTA () BEFORE , SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /AND ! '# ! , SHRI N.VIJAYA KUMARAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER $ / ITA NO. 1294/KOL/2011 %!& '(/ ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1999-2000 D.C.I.T, CIRCLE-8, KOLKATA M/S. I.T.C LIMITED PAN:AAACI 5950L (*+ / APPELLANT ) - ! - - VERSUS - . (-*+/ RESPONDENT ) *+ . / / FOR THE APPELLANT: / SHRI ANJAN PD.ROY, LD.DR -*+ . / / FOR THE RESPONDENT: / SHRI BISHAN SEAL, LD.AR . !0 . 1 /DATE OF HEARING : 09-02-2012 2' . 1 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 29-02-2012 3 / ORDER ! '# ! , , , , , , ,, , SHRI N. VIJAYA KUMARAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE DEPARTMENT IS FOR THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 1999-2000. IT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF IN COME-TAX (APPEALS), VIII, KOLKATA DATED 11-07-2011. 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE CHARGING INTERES T U/S.220(2) TO 8 MONTHS [FROM MAY, 2005] TO DECEMBER, 2005] INSTEAD OF 9 MONTHS [FROM MAY 2005 TO JANUARY 2006] WHEN THE OUTSTANDIN G DEMAND OF RS.8,27,56,339/- FALLING DUE FOR PAYMENT ON 05. 05.2005 WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE ON 09.01.2006. 2. THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD.CIT(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE CHARGING INTEREST U/S. 220(2) OF RS.39,03,920/- WHEN THE OUTSTANDING DEMAND OF RS.10 ,42,18,552/- SERVED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 02.01.2006 FALLING DUE FO R PAYMENT ON 01-02-2006 WAS PAID ON 25.05.2006. ITA NO. 1294/KOL/2011-A_NVK 2 3. THAT THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, MODIFY, ALTER OR RESCIND ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE CASE. 3. IT IS ONLY CHARGING OF INTEREST RESTRICTION TO SECTION 220(2) TO 8 MONTHS INSTEAD OF 9 MONTHS BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (A PPEALS). 4. THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ON PERUSAL OF MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECOMPUTE THE INTEREST U/S 220(2) CONSIDERING THE ACTUAL PERIOD OF 8 MONTHS INSTEAD OF 9 MONTHS. 5. IN THIS CASE UNDER APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAD REQUE STED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ADJUST THE DEMAND CREATED ON COMPLETION OF THE ASSESSMENT WI THIN THE STATUTORY PERIOD OF 30 DAYS AVAILABLE TO PAY FOR MAKING THE PAYABLE DEMAND. THE DELAY WAS ATTRIBUTABLE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO MAKE SUCH ADJUSTMENT. THEREFO RE, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX (APPEALS) RESTRICTED THE PERIOD TO 8 MONTHS I NSTEAD OF 9 MONTHS AS ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. FOR THIS PROPOSITION, THE LEARN ED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) FOLLOWED THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE ITAT, KOLKAT A IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1997-98 IN ITA NOS. 1017/KOL/2005 & 1543/KOL/2005, WHEREIN ON IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES THE INTEREST IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 220(2) WAS DELETED. RESPECTFULLY, FOLLOWING THE SAID DECISION OF THE HO NBLE ITAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSES SEE. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IT HAS BEEN SPECIFICALLY POINTED OUT BY THE LEARNE D COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) THAT ON PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT RECORDS THE ASSESSEE H AD REQUESTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHIN THE STATUTORY PERIOD TO ADJUST THE DEMAND AND ONLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DELAYED TO MAKE SUCH ADJUSTMENT, WHICH WILL NOT ATTRACT ANY PART OF DELA Y ATTRIBUTABLE TO ASSESSEE. HENCE, IMPOSITION OF INTEREST U/S. 220(2) FOR THE RESTRICTED PERIOD OF 8 MONTHS BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) IS QUITE JUSTIFIED. THEREFORE , THE FINDINGS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) REQUIRES NO INTERFERENCE. ITA NO. 1294/KOL/2011-A_NVK 3 7. IN THE RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL IS DISMIS SED. 4 3 5 ! 6 47 THIS ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON DT.29- 02-2012 SD/- SD/- ( , ) ( PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ( ! '# ! , ) ( N.VIJAYA KUMARAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ) DATED: 29-02-2012 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON SD/- SD/- [JM] [AM] 29/2/12 29/2 *PP SR.PS/ 3 . %%' 8''/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT- D.C.I.T CIR-8, AAYKAR BHAWAN, 5 TH FL., P-7 CHOWRINGHEE SQ, KOL-69. 2 -*+ / RESPONDENT : M/S. I T C LIMITED 37 J.L NEHRU ROAD , KOL-71. 3. %3!/ CIT, 4. %3! ()/ CIT(A), 5. ?%6 %!/ DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA [-' %/ TRUE COPY] 3!/ BY ORDER, 4 # /ASSTT REGISTRAR