TATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD ( FORMERLY VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD), MUMBAI V. DCIT RG 1(3), MUMBAI

ITA 974/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3612 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 6 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 05-02-2013
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJUNATHA SWAMY
• Assessee Lawyers: DINESH VYAS
• Section: 244A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI E BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ITA. NO. 974/MUM/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03) TATA COMMUNICATION LTD. APPELLANT (FORMERLY VIDESH SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. VIDESH SANCHAR BHAVAN, M.G. RD, FORT MUMBAI VS. DCIT RG 1(3) RESPONDENT AAYKAR BHAWAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI PAN: AAACV 2808C /BY APPELLANT :SHRI DINESH VYAS, /BY RESPONDENT :SHRI MANJUNATHA SWAMY /DATE OF HEARING : 16.08.2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :23.08.2016 ORDER PER SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV, J.M: THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-2, MUMBAI, DAT ED 28.11.2012 FOR A.Y. 2002-03 ON FOLLOWING GROUND: ITA NO.974/MUM/13 A.Y. 2002-03 [TATA COMMUNICATION LTD. VS. DCIT] PAGE 2 GROUNDS OF APPEAL 1. THE HONBLE CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN UPHOLDIN G THE LEVY OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 234D OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE HONBLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT DIRECTING THE LEARN ED ASSESSING OFFICER TO GRANT INTEREST U/S.244A ON REFUND DUE (INCLUDI NG INTEREST), IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTARY GROUNDS OF APPEAL ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE APPELLANT IS ENTITLED TO INTEREST UNDER SECTION 244 A ON REFUND DUE, WHICH OUGHT TO BE COMPUTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY DEDUCTING ONLY THE TAX COMPONENT FROM THE REFUND GRANTED EARL IER AND EXCLUDING THE INTEREST PORTION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND TH E CURRENT LEGAL POSITION; AND ACCORDINGLY NECESSARY DIRECTIONS BE G IVEN. ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTARY GROUNDS OF APPEAL GROUND NO 3 : SHORT GRANT OF INTEREST U/S 244A: ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, THE HON'BLE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT DIRECTING THE LEARNED ASSES SING OFFICER TO GRANT INTEREST U/S 244A ON REFUND DUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND THE CURRENT LEGAL POSITION. GROUND NO 4 : COMPUTATION OF INTEREST U/S 234D: ON THE FACTS AND IN CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND I N LAW, WHILE COMPUTING INTEREST U/S 234D, THE INTEREST GRANTED E ARLIER U/S 244A OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN EXCLUDED FROM THE REFUND AMOUNT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND THE CURRENT LEGAL POSITION. 2. AT THE OUTSET OF HEARING LEARNED AR POINTED OUT THAT THE ISSUE OF 234D HAS BEEN DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. IN DIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. (2012) 210 TAXMAN 466 (BOMBAY HIGH COURT) WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT PROVISION OF SECTION 234D ARE APPLICABLE EVEN TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR PRIOR TO 200 3-04, ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE COMPLETED AFTER 1 ST JUNE, 2003. LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY CONCEDED T HE FACT THAT ITA NO.974/MUM/13 A.Y. 2002-03 [TATA COMMUNICATION LTD. VS. DCIT] PAGE 3 THIS ISSUE IS BEING DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. SO, WE ARE NOT INCLINED TO INTERFERE WITH THE FINDING OF THE CIT(A ) IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF INTEREST U/S.234D OF THE INCOME TAX ACT . 3. NEXT ISSUE IS WITH REGARDS TO THE INTEREST U/S.2 44A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN GROUND BY WA Y OF ADDITIONAL GROUND. BEING LEGAL, IT CAN BE TAKEN INT ER ALIA CLAIMED INTEREST U/S.244A ON THE REFUND DUE, WHICH OUGHT TO BE COMPUTED BY ASSESSING OFFICER BY DEDUCTING ONLY THE TAX COMPONENT FROM THE REFUND GRANTED EARLIER AND EXCLU DING INTEREST PORTION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND CURREN T LEGAL POSITION. 3.1 LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE POINTED OUT THAT ISSUE IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y.1990-91 BY THE HONBLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E BENCH MUMBAI IN ITA NO.4962/MUM/2013 F OR A.Y.1990-91 DATED 22.10.2014 WHEREIN THIS ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. MATTER HAS BEEN REMITTED TO ASSESSING OFFICER WITH CERTAIN DIRECTIONS. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, RESPECTFULLY FO LLOWING AFOREMENTIONED DECISION OF TRIBUNAL IN GROUP CASE O F THE ASSESSEE THE RELEVANT PORTION OF WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN REPR ODUCED, WE DIRECT THE AO TO RECALCULATE THE INTEREST IN ACCORD ANCE WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. 5. IN THE RESULT THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS CONSIDERED TO BE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE MATTE R AFORESAID. 4. NOTHING CONTRARY WAS BROUGHT TO OUR KNOWLEDGE ON BEHALF OF REVENUE. FACTS BEING SIMILAR, SO, FOLLOWING SAM E REASONING, ITA NO.974/MUM/13 A.Y. 2002-03 [TATA COMMUNICATION LTD. VS. DCIT] PAGE 4 WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MA TTER TO ASSESSING OFFICER WITH SIMILAR DIRECTION. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I S PARTLY ALLOWED AS INDICATED ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 23 RD DAY OF AUGUST, 2016. SD/- SD/- ( RAJESH KUMAR ) (SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBE R MUMBAI: DATED 23/08/2016 TRUE COPY PRABHAT KESARWANI / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / REVENUE 2. / ASSESSEE 3. %&%'( ) / CONCERNED CIT 4. )- / CIT (A) 5. -./ 00'(, '(, %& / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. /45 67 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / , / %, '(, %&