VOLTAS LIMITED, MUMBAI V. DY CIT RANGE 8(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1902/MUM/2022

AI Insights

Voltas Limited filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, which dismissed their claim for interest on income tax refunds for the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention was the non-granting of interest under Section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, despite the company being entitled to refunds due to overpaid taxes. The CIT (A)'s dismissal was based on a misidentification of the assessment year, treating it as 2017-18 instead of 2012-13, which led to the tribunal's decision to remand the case back to the CIT (A) for proper adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 299277 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 31-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Pr. CIT Vs State Bank of India, Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Vs. DCIT, PCIT vs. State Bank of India, Chetan N. Shah Vs. CIT
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside
• Section: 154; 143(3); 244A; 143(1); 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM IT A N o. 1902/M um /2022 (Ass es smen t Y ea r 2012-13) Vo l ta s L i mi ted Vo l ta s H ou se-A, 4 th F lo o r, Dr. Ba ba sa h eb Amb e dk a r R oa d, Ch in c h pok li , M u mba i-4 00 033 Vs. Dy . CIT R a n g e 8 (3 )(1) R o o m No .61 5 , 6 th F lo o r, Aa y k ar Bh ava n , M .K. R o a d, M u mba i-40 0 0 20 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACV2809D Assessee by : S h ri Ni tesh Jo shi , AR Revenue by : S h ri Vran da U M a tk arn i , DR Date of h ea ri ng : 0 1 .1 1 .20 22 Date of pronouncement : 30.01 .20 23 O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. This appeal is filed by Voltas Limited (assessee/ appellant) against the appellate order passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)] for A.Y. 2012-13 dated 4 th October, 2021 raising following grounds of appeal:- “GROUND NO.1: NON-GRANT OF INTEREST U/S 244A (1) OF THE ACT 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) ['the CIT (A)'] erred in rejecting the claim of the Appellant Company of granting interest on Income Tax refund [i.e. Rs.5,39,84,057 arising from the CIT(A) order dated 26.2.2020] under Section 244A(1)(a) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') without properly addressing the ground raised by the Appellant Company. Page | 2 ITA No.1902/Mum/2022 Voltas Limited; A.Y. 12-13 1.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) erred in upholding the decision of the Assessing Officer ['the AO'] in not-granting interest on Income Tax refund under Section 244A (1) (a) of the Act to the Appellant Company without issuing any relevant notice and without allowing a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Appellant Company. 1.3 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) and the AO erred in overlooking the ratio of judgements passed by the Hon'ble High Courts in the matter of Pr. CIT Vs State Bank of India [ITA No. 1218 of 2016 (Bombay High Court)] and Ajanta Manufacturing Ltd. Vs. DCIT [(2017) 391 ITR 33 (Gujarat High Court)] dealing with the provision of sub-section (2) of Section 244A of the Act. 1.4 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred in upholding the decision of the AO without appreciating the fact that necessary satisfaction of the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner had not been obtained. 1.5 The Appellant Company therefore prays that the AO be suitably directed to grant interest on Income Tax refund of Rs. 5,39,84,057 u/s 244A(1)(a) of the Act. [Refer Page 2, Para 8 of Order giving effect to the CIT (A)'s Order dated 8.10.2020] GROUND NO.2: NON-GRANT OF INTEREST U/S 244A (LA) OF THE ACT 2.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A), erred in rejecting the claim of the Appellant Company of granting additional interest on Income Tax refund [i.e. Rs.90, 94,381 arising from the CIT (A) order dated 5.9.2018, received on 3.10.2018] under Section 244A (1A) of the Act without properly addressing of the ground raised by the Appellant Company. Page | 3 ITA No.1902/Mum/2022 Voltas Limited; A.Y. 12-13 2.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A), erred in upholding the decision of the AO in not-granting additional interest on Income Tax refund under Section 244A (1A) of the Act to the Appellant Company without issuing any relevant notice and without allowing a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Appellant Company. 2.3 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A), erred in uploading the decision of the AO in not granting additional interest on Income Tax refund under Section 244A (1A) of the Act ignoring the fact that Order giving effect to the CIT (A)'s order dated 27.2.2019 was passed after the time allowed under Section 153(5) of the Act. 2.4 The Appellant Company therefore prays that the AO be suitably directed to grant additional Interest on tax refund of Rs. 90, 94,381 u/s 244A (1A) of the Act. The Appellant Company craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary, substitute or add fresh grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal as they may be advised from time to time.” 02. By this appellate order the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee against the order passed under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 26 th March, 2019 passed by the Central Processing Centre, Bangalore for A.Y. 2017-18. The solitary issue involved in the appeal is non-granting of interest under Section 244A (1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) to the assessee for AY 2012-13. 03. Briefly stated facts show that i. Assessee is a company engaged in the field of Air Conditioning and refrigeration. ii. It filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 23 rd November, 2012 at a total income of ₹199,46,34,280/-. Page | 4 ITA No.1902/Mum/2022 Voltas Limited; A.Y. 12-13 iii. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) read with section 144C (4) of the Act on 29 th April, 2016. iv. This assessment order was challenged before the learned CIT (A), who passed an order on 5 th September, 2018. Certain issues were sent back to the file of the learned Assessing Officer by the appellate order. v. Therforec, the learned Assessing Officer passed an order on 27 th February, 2019 giving appeal effect to the order of the learned CIT (A). vi. Against which the assessee was aggrieved and filed an appeal before the learned CIT (A). Such appeal order was passed on 26 th February, 2020. vii. However, this appeal is for A.Y. 2012-13 whereas the order in appeal is also for A.Y. 2012-13 but the learned CIT (A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2012-13 holding that it is an appeal for A.Y. 2017-18. viii. The learned CIT (A) in his whole order has reproduced the submission of A.Y. 2017-18, as well as the ground of appeal for A.Y. 2017-18 but dismissed the appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2012-13. ix. The assessee has also made grievance stating that the order of the learned CIT (A) is pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 but it has inadvertently considered it for A.Y. 2012-13 and closed the e-proceedings tab of A.Y. 2012-13. Therefore, there is a mistake apparent from the record. x. Assessee also submitted copy of form no.35 and details of A.Y. 2012- 13. xi. However, a communication was received from the learned Assessing Officer dated 2 nd June, 2022 that this is not a fit case for rectification and grievance; it is not pertain to this office. It was further stated that grievance is fully resolved. The assessee has written several emails but there is no redressal of the grievance of the assessee. Page | 5 ITA No.1902/Mum/2022 Voltas Limited; A.Y. 12-13 04. We have heard the learned Authorized Representative and also perused the form no.35 filed before the learned CIT (A) for A.Y. 2012-13 submitted electronically on 2 nd November, 2020. The solitary ground raised before the learned CIT (A) was non-grant of interest under Section 244A (i) (a) of the Act. The fact shows that assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 23 rd November, 2012 at a total income of ₹199,46,34,280/-. This return was revised on 28 th March, 2014. Assessee was entitled to refund of ₹31, 48,590/-. The assessment was passed under Section 143(3) of the Act on 29 th April, 2016. The appeal was filed before the learned CIT (A) and consequent to that appellate order the learned Assessing Officer passed an order on 27 th February, 2019. In the above order, the learned Assessing Officer did not grant relief to the assessee as per the direction of the learned CIT (A). The refund was also not received. Therefore, once again appeal was preferred before the learned CIT (A) which was disposed of by order dated 26 th February, 2020 granting relief to the assessee. Further, 8 th October, 2020, the learned Assessing Officer passed an order giving appeal effect, however, denied interest under Section 244(1) (a) of the Act to the appellant company for a period from 1 st April, 2012 till the date on which the refund was granted stating that the appellant company had suo moto offered tax at the rate of 30% on capital gains on sale of flats in the return of income. Against that order giving appeal effect assessee preferred the appeal before the learned CIT (A) which met with the above unfortunate disposal of the appeal for the different assessment year. 05. The Ld CIT (A) in caption has decided the appeal for AY 2012-13. In the first para of the order, he mentions Assessment year 2017-18. Thereafter he proceeds to reproduce the grounds of appeal for AY 2017-18. He also reproduces the submission of the Assessee for AY 2017-18 where the assessee submitted that his grievance for AY 2017-18 has been resolved in order passed u/s 154 of the Act for AY 2017-18. Appeal of the Assessee was then dismissed as withdrawn. Thus Appeal of AY 2012-13 filed by the Assessee was disposed of by T he National faceless Appeal centre as if it is appeal for AY 2017-18. Such was the callous order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre. Even grievance raised by the assessee was not at all looked in to. The Assessee was left in lurch so far its appeal for AY 2012-13 is concerned. Plight of assessee is unfathomable. Page | 6 ITA No.1902/Mum/2022 Voltas Limited; A.Y. 12-13 06. The learned Authorized Representative submitted that where there was no reason attributable to assessee which delayed its refund claim, the interest on refund of excess amount of tax paid should be allowed to the assessee. The learned Authorized Representative relied on the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in PCIT vs. State Bank of India (2019) 102 taxmann.com 339 (Bombay) and Chetan N. Shah Vs. CIT (2015) 53 taxmann.com 18 (Bombay). As in the impugned case the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating the facts, grounds and the submission of the assessee for A.Y. 2017-18 and disposed off the appeal of the assessee for A.Y. 2012-13, there is no decision of the lower authority on this issue. 07. In view of the above facts, we set aside the whole appeal back to the file of the learned CIT (A) to dispose off the appeal filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2012-13 adjudicating the claim of the assessee with respect to non granting of interest on refund due under Section 244A (1)(a) of the Act. 08. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is set aside to the file of the ld CIT (A) with a direction to decide the issue within 90 days from this order. The assessee may be granted an opportunity of hearing if some further facts are required. 09. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.01.2023 S d/- S d/- (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) (P R ASH ANT M AH AR IS H I) (JUD IC I AL M E M BE R ) (ACCO UNT ANT M EM BE R ) Mumbai, Dated: 30.01.2023 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. BY ORDER, Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai