AWP ASSISTANCE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., GURGAON V. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1(1), GURGAON

ITA 6585/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6892 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-04-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 01-11-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHOK GAUTAM
• Assessee Lawyers: SAUMYA SINGH
• Keywords: Competent authority; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 244A; 234B; 148; 154; 139

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI A BENCH: NEW DELHI (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ) BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.6585/DEL/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 AWP ASSISTANCE (INDIA) PVT. LTD., 1 ST FLOOR, DLF SQUARE, M-BLOCK, JACARANDA MARG, DLF CITY, PHASE-II, GURGAON-122002. PAN-AAFCM1460J VS DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), GURGAON. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SH. SALIL KAPOOR, ADV. & MS. SAUMYA SINGH, ADV. RESPONDENT BY SH. ASHOK GAUTAM, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING 31.03.2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 08 .04.2021 ORDER PER KUL BHARAT, JM : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2013-14 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A)-II, GURGAO N DATED 11.08.2017. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE AND IN LAW THE CIT(A) WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE INTEREST U/S 244A ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX IN RESPECT OF THE SUBJECT ASSESSMENT YEAR SHOULD NOT BE GRANTED, EVEN AFTER CLA RIFICATORY AMENDMENT BY FINANCE ACT, 2016 (APPLICABLE W.E.F. 01 JUNE 2016 ). 2. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, THE LD. AO HAD GROSSLY ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING INTEREST ON SELF ASSESSMENT TAX ON THE O RDER PASSED BY THE LD. AO AFTER 01 JUNE 2016, WHICH WAS UPHELD BY THE LD. CIT(A ). ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 2 3. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE, THE LD. AO AND LD. CI T(A) HAD ERRED IN NOT FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN IN CASE OF STOCKHOLDING CORPORATION OF INDIA VS N.C. TEWARI, CIT REPORTED IN (20 15) 373 ITR 282 (BOM.) AND CIT VS BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED (CALCUTTA HIGH COURT) (ITA NO.526 OF 2004) (ORDER DATED 02/02/2016), WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT INTEREST U/S 244A IS ALLOWABLE EVEN ON SELF ASSESSMENT TAX PAYMENTS, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS AN D ORDERS PASSED PRIOR TO THE AMENDMENT MADE BY FINANCE ACT, 2016 . 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN T HIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DISALLOWANCE OF THE CLAIM OF INTEREST ON ASSESS MENT YEAR PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. 3. FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE PRESENT APPEAL ARE THAT THE ASSESSMENT U/S 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) WAS FRAME D VIDE ORDER DATED 22.09.2015 WHEREBY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ACCEPTED T HE RETURN INCOME FOR RS.20,83,91,190/-. HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENTLY, THE ASS ESSEE FILED APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE ACT. THE ORDER WAS RECTIFIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, THE CLAIM OF THE INTEREST ON SELF ASSESSMEN T TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 244A OF THE ACT WAS DISALLOWED. AGAINS T THIS, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) WHO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS SUSTAINED THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AGAINST THIS, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 5. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISS UE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ENT ITLED FOR THE INTEREST ON THE SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX. LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 3 RELIED UPON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF PU NJAB & HARYANA REFERRED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS PUNJAB CHEMICAL & CROP. PROTECTION LTD. 370 ITR 481 [2015] (PUNJAB & HARYANA) (MAG.). FURTHER, RELIANCE WAS PLACED UPON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE BO MBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF STOCKHOLDING CORPORATION OF INDIA VS N.C. TEWARI, CIT REPORTED IN (2015) 373 ITR 282 (BOM.) AND ALSO THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE CIT VS BIRLA CORPORATION LIMITED (CALCUTTA HIGH COURT) (ITA NO.526 OF 2004) (ORDER DATED 02/02/2 016) . LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED IN THE LIGHT OF THIS BINDING PREC EDENTS, THE AUTHORITIES BELOW OUGHT TO HAVE DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVO UR OF THE ASSESSEE AND ALLOW THE INTEREST AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSES SEE ON THE SELF- ASSESSMENT TAX. 6. PER CONTRA, LD.SR.DR VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED THE SUBMISSION S AND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. LD. SR.DR ALSO RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE LD.CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. WE FIND THAT LD.CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE BY OBSERVING AS UNDER:- 4.3. I HAVE GIVEN CAREFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE ARGUME NTS OF THE APPELLANT AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE INC OME TAX ACT. THE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 244A SUB SECTIONS (A) & (A A) WAS MADE W.E.F 01.06.2016. THEREFORE, IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 244A (I)(AA) WILL NOT APPLY TO CASES PRIOR TO 01.06.2016. THE CLAIM OF THE APPELLANT CANNOT BE ALLOWED AS THIS CASE P ERTAINS TO ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 4 A.Y.2013-14 AND THE SELF ASSESSMENT TAX DEPOSITED BY TH E APPELLANT WAS BEFORE THE CUTOFF DATE FROM WHICH 244A (I)(AA) BECAME EFFECTIVE. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR ALLOWANCE OF INTEREST U/S 244A(I)(AA) ON THE REFUND AMOUNT CANNOT BE ALLOWED. 8. FROM THE ABOVE FINDING OF LD.CIT(A), IT IS CLEAR THAT THE CLA IM OF INTEREST WAS DISALLOWED PURELY ON THE GROUND THAT THE A MENDMENT TO SECTION 244A SUB-SECTION (A) & (AA) OF THE ACT WAS MADE W.E.F. 01.06.2016 SINCE THE PRESENT APPEAL PERTAINS TO THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2013-14. THEREFORE, THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 24 4A OF THE ACT COULD NOT BE MADE APPLICABLE FOR THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL. 9. WE HAVE PERUSED THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH C OURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA IN THE CASE OF CIT VS PUNJAB CHEMICA L & CROP. PROTECTION LTD. (SUPRA). THE HONBLE HIGH COURT HAS HELD AS UNDER:- 8. THE AFORESAID PROVISION CAME UP FOR INTERPRETAT ION AND CONSIDERATION IN NATIONAL HORTICULTURE BOARD'S CASE { SUPRA) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD AS UNDER (PAGE 16 OF 253 ITR) : 'A CONJOINT READING OF THE PROVISIONS QUOTED ABOVE SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE INTEREST ON THE A MOUNT OF REFUND AT THE RATES PRESCRIBED IN CLAUSES (A) AND (B ) OF SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 244A. THE RATIONALE UNDERLYING THIS PROVISION IS TO COMPENSATE THE ASSESSEE IN LIEU OF THE DEPRIVATION OF HIS PROPERTY RIGHT BY VIRTUE OF UNLAW FUL COLLECTION OF TAX. IF THE PROCEEDINGS RESULTING IN THE REFUND ARE DELAYED DUE TO REASONS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE ASSESSEE, THEN THE PERIOD OF DELAY HAS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE PERIOD F OR WHICH THE INTEREST IS PAYABLE. IN OTHER WORDS, IF THE ASSES SEE IS ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 5 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DELAY IN THE FINALISATION OF THE PROCEEDINGS ON THE BASIS OF WHICH HE BECOMES ENTITLED TO REFUND, T HEN THE PERIOD OF DELAY IS TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL PERIO D FOR WHICH INTEREST BECOMES PAYABLE. HOWEVER, THERE IS NOTH ING IN THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF SUB-SECTION (1) AND (2) OF SECTI ON 244A FROM WHICH IT CAN BE INFERRED THAT THE ASSESSEE CAN BE DEPRIVED OF THE INTEREST IN RESPECT OF THE PERIOD D URING WHICH HIS APPLICATION FOR REFUND REMAINS PENDING BEFORE T HE COMPETENT AUTHORITY.' 9. THE ISSUE WHETHER REFUND OF SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX O N ACCOUNT OF EXCESS AMOUNT OF TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE WOULD ENTIT LE AN ASSESSEE TO CLAIM INTEREST THEREON AT THE TIME OF REF UND WAS CONSIDERED BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT IN SUTLEJ INDUSTRI ES LTD.'S CASE {SUPRA). FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE MADRAS HIGH COU RT IN CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FINANCE CO. LTD.'S CASE {S UPRA), IT WAS OBSERVED AS UNDER (PAGE 337 OF 325 ITR) : 'IN THE CASE OF CIT V. CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT & FI NANCE CO. LTD. [2007] 294 ITR 438 (MAD), THE MADRAS HIGH CO URT DEALT WITH THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THE ASSESSEE IS EN TITLED TO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 244A AS PER CLAUSE (L)(B) OF T HAT SECTION, WHEN THE REFUND ARISES ON ACCOUNT OF PAYMENT OF SEL F ASSESSMENT TAX. THE MADRAS HIGH COURT OBSERVED AS U NDER (PAGE 442 OF 294 ITR): 'EVEN THOUGH THE SHORT TITLE TO SECTION 140A READS AS SELF- ASSESSMENT, THE CHARGING PHRASE EMPLOYED : SECTION 1 40A NAMELY 'WHERE ANY TAX IS PAYABLE ON THE BASIS OF ANY RETURN REQUIRED TO BE FURNISHED UNDER SECTION 115WD OR SEC TION 115WH OR SECTION 139 OR SECTION 142 OR SECTION 148 OR SECTION 153A, AS THIS CASE MAY BE ; THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE LIABLE TO PAY SUCH TAX TOGETHER WITH INTEREST PAYABLE UNDER ANY ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 6 PROVISION OF THIS ACT FOR ANY DELAY IN FURNISHING T HE RETURN', MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN : (I) THE TAX PAID UNDER SECTION 115WJ, WHICH DEALS WIT H ADVANCE TAX IN RESPECT OF FRINGE BENEFITS; OR (II) THE TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE UNDER SECTION 206C; OR (III) ANY TAX PAID BY WAY OF ADVANCE TAX OR ANY TAX TREATED AS PAID UNDER SECTION 199, WHICH DEALS WITH CREDIT FOR TAX DEDUCTED, WHICH ARE PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 244A(L)(A). THE PROVISO TO SECTION 244A(L)(A) MAKES IT CLEAR THAT NO INTEREST SHALL BE PAYABLE IF THE AMOUNT OF REFUND IS LESS THAN 1 0 PER CENT, ON REGULAR ASSESSMENT WITH REGARD TO THE REFUND OF ADVANCE TAX PAID UNDER SECTION 115WJ IN RESPECT OF FRINGE BENEFITS ; (II) TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE UNDER SECTION 206C ; AND (III) ADVANCE TAX OR ANY TAX TREATED AS PAID UNDER SE CTION 199. BUT, WITH RESPECT TO OTHER TAX AS PER SECTION 244A(L)(B ), THE INTEREST SHALL BE PAYABLE EVEN IF THE AMOUNT IS LESS TH AN 10 PER CENT, OF THE TAX AS DETERMINED UNDER SECTION 143 (1) OR ON THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT, BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROVISO TO SECTION 244A(L)(B) AS PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 244A(L)(A).' THE MADRAS HIGH COURT FURTHER OBSERVED (PAGE 443 OF 294 ITR) : 'IT IS ALSO TRITE LAW THAT WHEREVER THE ASSESSEE IS E NTITLED TO REFUND, THERE IS A STATUTORY LIABILITY ON THE REVENUE TO PAY THE INTEREST ON SUCH REFUND ON GENERAL PRINCIPLES TO PAY THE INTEREST ON SUMS WRONGFULLY RETAINED (REFERENCE SANDVI K ASIA LTD).' THE SUPREME COURT DISMISSED THE SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIO N (SLP) NO. 16877 OF 2008 FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE DE CISION IN CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE CO. LTD. [20 07] ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 7 294 ITR 438 (MAD , VIDE ORDER DATED DECEMBER 3, 2009. T HE SUPREME COURT HAS ALSO, RECENTLY, IN THE CASE OF CIT V . H.E.G. LTD. REPORTED IN [2010] 324 ITR 331 (SCI, VIDE ITS ORD ER DATED DECEMBER 3, 2009, HELD THAT THE EXPRESSION 'REFUND OF ANY AMOUNT' WOULD INCLUDE INTEREST UNDER SECTION 244A (ON REFUND OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE) TO WHICH THE ASSESSEE WA S LAWFULLY ENTITLED BUT HAD BEEN WRONGLY WITHHELD BY THE DEPARTMENT.' 10. IT WAS FURTHER HELD THAT THE AMOUNT OF TAX DUE ON THE RETURNED INCOME IS TO BE PAID BY WAY OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOUR CE (SECTION 199), ADVANCE TAX (SECTION 209) OR BY WAY OF SELF-ASSESSMEN T TAX (SECTION 140A). IN THE EVENT OF REFUND, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO PAYMENT OF INTEREST ON THE EXCESS AMOUNT OF TAX PAID. IT WAS NOT ICED AS UNDER (PAGE 338 OF 325 ITR) : 'THE TAX DUE ON THE RETURNED INCOME HAS TO BE PAID BY WAY OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE (SECTION 199), ADVANCE TAX (SEC TION 209) OR BY WAY OF SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX (SECTION 140A). IN ADDITION, WHERE THE ASSESSMENT IS COMPLETED AT AN INCO ME HIGHER THAN THE RETURNED INCOME, THE TAX PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE IS SPECIFIED IN THE NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUE D UNDER SECTION 156 OF THE ACT. WHERE THERE IS A SHORTFALL IN PAYMENT ON TAX VIS-A-VIS THE TAX FINALLY DUE ON THE ASSESSED INCOME, THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234B OF THE ACT. CONVERSELY, WHERE THE REVENUE MAKES A HIGH-P ITCHED ASSESSMENT WHICH IS SUBSEQUENTLY REDUCED/MODIFIED IN APPEAL, ANY PAYMENT OF TAXES MADE, WHICH ARE SUBSEQUENT LY REFUNDED AS A CONSEQUENCE OF RELIEF OBTAINED IN APPEA LS, ETC., ARE MONIES LEGITIMATELY BELONGING TO THE TAXPAYERS AND WRONGLY WITHHELD BY THE GOVERNMENT. THIS IS BASED ON T HE PRINCIPLE THAT IF THE REVENUE HAD, IN THE FIRST INSTA NCE, MADE CORRECT ASSESSMENT OF THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASSESS EE, THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED BY THE USE OF MONEY. IN SUCH A SITUATION, WHERE PRE-PAID TAXES ARE IN EXC ESS OF THE ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 8 ASSESSED TAX, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO REFUND OF SU CH TAX ALONG WITH INTEREST THEREON. WHERE AN ASSESSEE OUT OF ABUNDANT CAUTION PAYS SELF - ASSESSMENT WHILST STAKING A CLAIM IN THE RETURN, WHICH CLAIM IS ACCEPTED, RESULTING IN REFUND OF SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX, THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE EQUALLY ENTITLED TO INTEREST THEREON. SECTION 244A WAS INSERTED IN THE STATUTE AS A MEASUR E OF RATIONALIZATION TO ENSURE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS DULY COMPENSATED BY THE GOVERNMENT, BY WAY OF PAYMENT OF INTEREST FOR MONIES LEGITIMATELY BELONGING TO THE ASSE SSEE AND WRONGFULLY RETAINED BY THE GOVERNMENT, WITHOUT ANY GAPS. THEREFORE, IN OUR VIEW WHERE THE SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX PAID BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 140A IS REFUNDED, THE ASS ESSEE SHOULD BE, ON PRINCIPLE ENTITLED TO INTEREST THEREON SIN CE THE SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX FALLS WITHIN THE EXPRESSION 'REFUND OF ANY AMOUNT'.' SIMILAR VIEW WAS EXPRESSED BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT I N M.M.T.C. LTD. 'S CASE {SUPRA). 11. IT MAY BE OBSERVED THAT IN SO FAR AS THE NATUR E OF PAYMENT OF TAX IS CONCERNED, THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE, ADVANCE TAX AND ALSO TAX PAID BY WAY OF SELF-ASSESSMENT, AFTER ITS ADJUSTM ENT IN THE TAX LIABILITY OF THE ASSESSEE ON REGULAR ASSESSMENT LOSES ITS ORIGINAL CHARACTER AND BECOMES TAX PAID IN PURSUANCE OF THE LIABILITY. ONCE THAT IS SO, IT CANNOT BE HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ONL Y ENTITLED TO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 244A(L)(B) ON TAX DEDUCTED AT S OURCE OR ADVANCE TAX AND NOT ON SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX PAID UNDE R SECTION 140A OF THE ACT WHICH WAS FOUND TO BE PAID IN EXCES S. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 244A(L)(B) OF THE ACT ON THE REFUND OF SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX AS WELL. ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 9 12. THE TRIBUNAL, WHILE ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE, HAD NO TICED AS UNDER : '6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS CAREFULLY O N THIS ISSUE. SECTION 244A DEALS WITH THE GRANT OF INTEREST ON REFUND OF ANY AMOUNT OF TAX WHICH BECOMES DUE TO THE ASSES SEE IN TERMS OF THE PROVISIONS OF ACT. CLAUSES (A) AND (B) OF SUB- SECTION (1) OF SECTION 244A DEAL WITH TWO DIFFERENT SIT UATIONS. CLAUSE (A) DEALS WITH REFUND OF TAXES WHICH HAVE BEEN PAID UNDER SECTION 115WJ OR COLLECTED AT SOURCE UNDER SECT ION 206C OR PAID BY WAY OF ADVANCE TAX OR TREATED AS PA ID UNDER SECTION 199 OF THE ACT. CLAUSE (B) DEALS WITH REFUND O F TAXES IN ANY OTHER CASE. CLEARLY, IN SO FAR AS THE PRESENT CASE IS CONCERNED, THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE (A) ARE NOT ATTR ACTED INASMUCH AS IT IS UNDISPUTED THAT THE REFUND ACCRUIN G TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATE D DECEMBER 12, 2001, WAS NOT OF TAXES, WHICH HAVE BEEN PAID IN THE MANNER STATED IN CLAUSE (A). THE TAX REFUNDE D IN THE INSTANT CASE HAS BEEN PAID AS SELF- ASSESSMENT TAX U NDER SECTION 140A OF THE ACT AND, THUS, AS PER THE ASSESSE E, CLAUSE (B) GOVERNS THE FIELD. THE REVENUE CONTENDS THAT CLAU SE (B) IS CONFINED TO SITUATIONS WHERE THE TAX REFUNDED HAS BE EN PAID IN TERMS OF A NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER UNDER SECTION 156. IN OUR VIEW, THE IMPLICATION OF CLAU SE (B) AS IS UNDERSTOOD BY THE DEPARTMENT, IS NOT BORNE OUT O F THE LANGUAGE OF THE STATUTE. NO DOUBT, SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX IS PAID BY AN ASSESSEE ON THE BASIS OF THE INCOME DECLARED IN THE RETURN. ONCE THE TAX SO PAID GETS ADJUSTED AGAINST T HE TAX DETERMINED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UPON ASSESSMENT , SUCH SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX TAKES THE IMPRINT OF A TAX PAID I N PURSUANCE TO AN ASSESSMENT. IN FACT A SIMILAR ISSUE W AS CONSIDERED BY THE AHMEDABAD BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 10 CASE OF DHANVI TRADING AND INVESTMENT (P.) LTD. {SUPR A) THE RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH WE REPRODUCE HEREIN : 'SO LONG AS THE SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX POSSESSES AND RET AINS THE CHARACTER OF SELF-ASSESSMENT, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF RECKONING THE SAME FOR THE PURPOSES OF TREATING IT A S EXCESS PAYMENT AND ALLOWING INTEREST AS ENVISAGED UNDER SECT ION 244A TILL THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT IS MADE UNDER SECTIO N 143 OR SECTION 144, IT IS ONLY ON THE DATE THE ASSESSMENT IS MAD E THAT THE DEEMING FICTION CONTAINED UNDER SECTION 244A(2) COMES INTO PLAY AND THE SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX IS DEEMED TO H AVE BEEN PAID TOWARDS THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT. IT IS, THEREFORE , ON THE DATE OF THE REGULAR ASSESSMENT THAT THE SELF-ASSESSM ENT TAX LOSES ITS IDENTITY AND ASSUMES THE CHARACTER OF THE TAX PAID FOR THE PURPOSE OF QUANTIFICATION OF ANY EXCESS OF TAX PAYMENT IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE OF DEMAND ISSUED UNDER SECTIO N 156. THE EXPLANATION APPENDED TO SECTION 244A(1) AMPLY CLA RIFIES THE POSITION AS EXPLAINED ABOVE.' FROM THE ABOVE, IT, THEREFORE, FOLLOWS THAT TAX PAID UND ER SECTION 140A IS ALSO TAKEN AS PAID IN PURSUANCE OF AN ASSESSMENT AFTER THE COMPLETION OF ASSESSMENT. 7. MOREOVER, THE RATIONALE OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTI ON 244A HAS BEEN A SUBJECT MATTER OF REVIEW BY THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN T HE CASE OF NATIONAL HORTICULTURE BOARD (SUPRA). IT HAS BEEN OPINE D THAT DIE RATIONALE UNDERLYING THE PROVISION WAS TO COMPEN SATE THE ASSESSEE FOR DEPRIVATION OF HIS PROPERTY RIGHT WHIC H WAS BY VIRTUE OF AN UNLAWFUL COLLECTION OF TAX. IN FACT, TESTED ON SUCH ANVIL, INTEREST UNDER SECTION 244A ON REFUND OF TAX P AID AS SELF-ASSESSMENT TAX CANNOT BE CONSIDERED AS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 244A OF THE ACT. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EXPLANATION BELOW CLAUSE (B) IS MERELY TO STIPULATE T HE PERIOD ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 11 FOR WHICH THE INTEREST HAS TO BE GRANTED. FOR THE PU RPOSE OF CLAUSE (B), THE INTEREST IS PAYABLE FOR THE PERIOD ST ARTING FROM THE DATE OF THE PAYMENT OF TAX ENDING UP TO THE DAT E ON WHICH SUCH REFUND IS GRANTED. THEREFORE, IN PRINCIPLE, WE UPHO LD THE STAND OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT WAS ELIGIBLE FOR INTERE ST UNDER SECTION 244A(L)(B) ON THE REFUND ACCRUING TO IT AS A RESULT OF THE ORDER OF GIVING APPEAL EFFECT ON DECEMBER 12, 2001. HO WEVER, WHILE COMPUTING THE ELIGIBLE INTEREST, IT APPEARS THA T THE PERIOD WAS CONSIDERED FROM 1ST DAY OF APRIL 1989 UP TO THE DATE OF REFUND. WHEREAS IN TERMS OF CLAUSE (B) OF SECTION 244A (L)(B) READ WITH THE EXPLANATION THEREOF THE PERIOD FOR WHI CH THE INTEREST CAN BE GRANTED IS THE DATE ON WHICH THE SE LF- ASSESSMENT TAX WAS ADJUSTED AGAINST THE ASSESSED IN COME AND UP TO THE DATE OF ACTUAL GRANT OF REFUND. THEREFO RE, TO THIS EXTENT, WE FIND THAT THERE WAS A MISTAKE APPARENT IN THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER DATED DECEMBER 12, 2001, BY WAY OF WHICH INTEREST UNDER SECTION 244A AMOUNTING TO RS. 7 ,02,044 WAS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE TH E ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES AND DIRECT THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER TO RECOMPUTE THE INTEREST ELIGIBLE TO THE ASSESSEE IN THE MANNER INDICATED ABOVE.' 13. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAD MADE REFERE NCE TO PLETHORA OF JUDGMENTS NOTICED IN PARAGRAPH 4 HEREINB EFORE. A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE SAID JUDGMENTS CLEARLY SPELLS OUT THAT T HE ISSUE IN THESE JUDGMENTS WAS DIFFERENT IN THE LIGHT OF THE F ACTUAL MATRIX INVOLVED THEREIN AND IN NONE OF THE CASES, THE ISSUE WHETHER THE ASSESSEE WAS ENTITLED TO INTEREST ON REFUND OF SELF-A SSESSMENT TAX PAID UNDER SECTION 140A OF THE ACT IN TERMS OF SECT ION 244A OR NOT, WAS UNDER CONSIDERATION. THUS, NO ADVANTAGE CAN BE DE RIVED BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE FROM THE AFORESAID PRONOUNCEMENTS. ITA NO.-6585/DEL/2017 12 10. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE BINDING PRECEDENTS, WE THEREFO RE, DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF INTEREST ON SELF- ASSESSMENT TAX AS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THUS, G ROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ABOVE DECISION WAS PRONOUNCED ON CONCLUSION OF VIRTUAL HE ARING IN THE PRESENCE OF BOTH THE PARTIES ON 08 TH APRIL, 2021. SD/- SD/- (G.S. PANNU) (KUL BHARAT) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER * AMIT KUMAR * COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI