Dy. CIT Cir- II Jalgaon., Jalgaon V. Rajmal Lakhichand Jewellers P. Ltd., Jalgaon

ITA 1844/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 184424514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 18-09-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S P WALIMBE
• Section: 244A; 115JB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH B, PUNE BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1844/PN/2012 (ASSTT.YEAR : 2008-09) DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2, JALGAON. .. APPELLANT VS. RAJMAL LAKHICHAND JEWELLERS PVT. LTD., 169, BALAJI PETH, JALGAON. PAN NO. AAECS0061L .. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.P. WALIMBE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK DATE OF HEARING : 01-01-2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06-01-2014 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 13-07-2012 OF THE CIT(A)-II, NASHIK RELATING TO ASS ESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. FACTS OF THE CASE, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESS EE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF GOLD AND SILVER. REGULAR BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS ARE MAINTAINED WHICH ARE ALSO AUDITED UNDER THE COMPANI ES ACT, 1956 AND U/S.44AB OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME A T NIL AND BOOK PROFIT IN TERMS OF SECTION 115JB AT RS.2,72,56,915/- AND TAX PAYABLE THEREON AT RS.30,88,209/- ON 25-09-2009. THE ASSESSEE WAS ENT ITLED TO TAX CREDIT OF RS.92,91,273/- BY WAY OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO PAID SELF ASSESSMENT TAX OF RS.70,00,000/- ON 02-05 -2009. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, IN DOING SO, THE FACT OF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES WAS LOST SIGHT OF. 2 THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED A REFUND OF RS.1,32,03,064/- A ND INTEREST THEREON AS PER ITS CALCULATION WAS AS UNDER : TDS : RS. 92,91,273/- (+) S.A. : RS. 70,00,000/- ------------------------------- RS.1,62,91,273/- (-) TAX PAYABLE : RS. 30,88,209/- -------------------------------- BALANCE REFUNDABLE RS.1,32,03,064/- -------------------------------- 2.1 HOWEVER, AS PER THE ASSESSEE IT HAS RECEIVED A REFUND OF RS.1,39,122,100/- ON 01-03-2011 INCLUDING INTEREST OF RS.7,13,950/-. THE SAID INTEREST WAS PAID ONLY ON RS.62,08,150/- (I.E. TDS OF RS.92,96,362/- (-) TAX LIABILITY OF RS.30,82,088/-) AND NOT ON THE AMO UNT OF RS.70,00,000/- (ON RS.70,00,000/- @0.5% FOR THE PERIOD FROM MAY 20 09 TO FEBRUARY 2011). THE ASSESSEE ACCORDINGLY MADE AN APPLICATIO N TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 14-03-2011 REQUESTING HIM TO PAY INTERES T ON THE S.A. OF RS.70,00,000/- PAID ON 02-05-2009. HOWEVER, THE AO REJECTED THE ASSESSEES APPLICATION ON 16-05-2011 ON THE GROUND THAT THERE WAS NO PROVISION IN THE ACT TO GRANT INTEREST ON THE S.A. PAID. 3. IN APPEAL THE LD.CIT(A) DIRECTED THE ASSESSING O FFICER TO PAY INTEREST ON SELF ASSESSMENT TAX PAID U/S.140A BY HO LDING AS UNDER : 5. I HAVE PERUSED THE PROVISIONS OF LAW WITH REGARD T O THE ISSUE RAISED AND THE DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY THE APPELLANT. HON BLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE CO. LTD., [(2007) 211 CTR (MAD) 384] HAS HELD THAT ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO INTEREST U/S.244A ON REFUND OF TAX PAID U/S.140A ON SEL F ASSESSMENT. SIMILARLY, HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF C IT VS. SUTLEJ IND. LTD. [(2010) 231 CTR 0080] HAS HELD THAT WHERE SELF ASSESSMENT TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE U/S.140A IS REFUNDED, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE, ON PRIN CIPLE ENTITLED TO INTEREST THEREON SINCE THE SELF ASSESSMENT TAX FALLS WIT HIN THE EXPRESSION REFUND OF ANY AMOUNT. IT HAS FURTHER HELD THAT TH E COMPUTATION OF INTEREST ON SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX HAS TO BE IN TERMS OF SEC.244A(1)(B) OF THE ACT, I.E. FROM THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF SUCH AMOUNT UP TO THE DA TE ON WHICH REFUND IS ACTUALLY GRANTED. THE JUDGMENT ALSO MENTIONS THAT TH E SLP AGAINST THE MADRAS HIGH COURT ORDER IN THE CASE OF CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE CO. LTD. WAS DISMISSED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME C OURT. I AM 3 THEREFORE, IN AGREEMENT WITH THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT IT WAS ENTITLED TO INTEREST U/S.244A ON REFUND OF RS.70,00,00 0/- PAID AS SELF ASSESSMENT TAX U/S.140A OF THE ACT. AS SEEN ABOVE, THE COURTS HAVE CONSISTENTLY TAKEN A VIEW IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. TA KING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND THE DECISIONS MENTIONED ABOVE, I AM OF THE OPINION THAT THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO INTEREST ON THE PAYMENT OF RS.70,00,000/- MADE U/S.140A OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT JUST IFIED IN REJECTING APPELLANTS CLAIM IN THIS REGARD. ASSESSING OFFICER IS T HEREFORE, DIRECTED TO PAY INTEREST ON REFUND INCLUDING SELF ASSESSMENT TAX IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AS DISCUSSED ABOVE. 4. AGGRIEVED WITH SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE REVE NUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US WITH THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING INTEREST U/S.244A OF SELF ASSESSMENT TAX U/S.140A OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD.C IT(A) HAS NOT TRULY APPRECIATED THE EXPLANATION TO SECTION 244A(1 )(B). 3. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD.C IT(A) HAS NOT APPRECIATED THAT THE PAYMENT MADE U/S.140A, I/.E., S ELF ASSESSMENT TAX IS NOT COVERED IN THE EXPLANATION NOR IT WAS A PAYMENT IN RESPECT TO NOTICE U/S.156 OF THE ACT. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL ARGUMENTS MADE BY B OTH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE CIT(A) AND THE PAPER BOOK FILED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. WE HAVE ALSO CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS DECISIONS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE BY BOTH THE SIDES. WE FIND IT IS THE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT( A) IS BASED UPON THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT AND DELHI HI GH COURT WHICH ARE NOT BINDING AND ARE NOT ACCEPTED. ACCORDING TO THE REVENUE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE INSTANT CASE HAS GRANTED INTEREST ON PAYMENT WHICH WAS CLEARLY SPECIFIED U/S.244A INCLUDING THE EXPLANATIO N AND THE PAYMENT MADE U/S.140A, I.E. SELF ASSESSMENT TAX IS NOT COVERED I N THAT EXPLANATION NOR IT WAS PAYMENT IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE U/S.156 OF THE I. T. ACT. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ENTITLED FOR INTEREST ON PAYMENT U /S.140A OF THE I.T. ACT. 4 5.1 IT IS THE CASE OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSES SEE THAT THE ISSUE HAS BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECIS ION OF THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF DDIT (INTERNAT IONAL TAXATION) VS. M/S. G.E. ASSET MANAGEMENT VIDE ITA NO.6015/MUM/200 9 ORDER DATED 31-05-2011 FOR A.Y. 2005-06 WHEREIN THE TRIBUNAL FO LLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SUTLEJ INDUSTRIES LTD. REPORTED IN 325 ITR 331 HAS HELD THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS ENTITLED TO INTEREST ON REFUND OF SELF ASSESSMENT TAX. THE RELEVANT ORD ER OF THE MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S. G.E. ASSE T MANAGEMENT (SUPRA) READ AS UNDER : 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION MADE BY BO TH THE SIDES, PERUSED THE ORDERS OF A.O. AND THE CIT(A). WE HAVE AL SO CONSIDERED THE DECISIONS CITED BEFORE US. THE ONLY DISPUTE IN THE APPE AL IS REGARDING ALLOWABILITY OF INTEREST U/S 244A ON ACCOUNT OF SELF A SSESSMENT TAX. WE FIND THE ID. CIT(A) WHILE HOLDING THAT INTEREST U/S 244A(1 )(B) IS PAYABLE, HAS RELIED ON A COUPLE OF DECISIONS. WE FIND RECENTLY, TH E HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SUTLEJ INDUSTRIES LTD. [20 10] 325 ITR 331 (DELHI) HAS HELD THAT WHERE SELF ASSESSMENT TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 140A IS REFUNDED, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE, ON PRINCIPLE, ENTITLED TO INTEREST THEREON SINCE THE SELF ASSESSMENT TAX FALLS WITHIN THE EXPRESSION 'R EFUND OF ANY AMOUNT'. THE ID. D.R. COULD NOT POINT OUT ANY CONTR ARY DECISION. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND SINCE THE ORDER OF THE ID. CIT(A) IS I N CONSONANCE WITH THE DECISION OF HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF A SHOK LEYLAND LTD. (SUPRA) AND HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF S UTLEJ INDUSTRIES LTD. (SUPRA) AND THE DECISIONS OF CO ORDINATE BENCHES OF THE TRIBUNAL, THEREFORE, IN ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY DECISION BROUGHT TO OUR NO TICE BY THE ID. D.R., THE SAME IS UPHELD. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 5.2 SINCE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN THE INSTANT CA SE IS BASED ON THE DECISIONS OF HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT AND DELHI HI GH COURT AND THE DECISION OF MUMBAI BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL CITED (SUP RA) AND SINCE NOTHING CONTRARY WAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE AGAINST THE ABOV E DECISIONS, THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE CI T(A) DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO PAY INTEREST ON THE SELF ASSES SMENT TAX PAID U/S.140A 5 OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. ACCORDINGLY, THE SAME IS UP HELD. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REVENUE ARE ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06-01-2014. SD/- SD/- (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMB ER PUNE, DATED : 06 TH JANUARY 2014 SATISH COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. THE ASSESSEE 2. THE DEPARTMENT 3. THE CIT(A)-II, NASHIK 4. THE CIT-II, NASHIK 5. D.R. B BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE