M/S VISHAL PAPER INDUSTRIES V. COMMISSIONER OF IT AAYAKAR BHAWAN PATIALA

ITA/394/2014

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Vishal Paper Industries appealing against the orders of the Income Tax authorities concerning the assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10. The core issue revolved around a calculation error made by the Assessing Officer (AO) in the demand report, which incorrectly stated the figures post-rectification under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana had previously adjudicated a similar issue in ITA-194-2012, where it was recognized that the AO had erred in the calculation related to the interest on borrowed capital attributable to assets not put in use. The court's decision in this case was to apply the same rectification to the subsequent assessment years in question.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 726073 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-04-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: ITA-194-2012
• Laws Referred To: Section 154 of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: AMANPREET SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RADHIKA SURI; ABHINAV NARANG
• Keywords: Income Tax; Interest on borrowed capital; Rectification; Assets Not Put in Use
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

"210 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA M/s Vishal Paper Industries Commissioner of Income Tax M/s Vishal Paper Industries Assistant Commissioner CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE M Present: Ms. Radhika Suri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate for the appellant(s). Mr. Amanpreet (A.P.), Singh, for the respondent. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) 1. Both the counsel are present appeal decided on 02.04.2024 2. This Court in ITA interest part and passed the following order: “Thus, it was pointed out that there is a mistake in the ca done by the AO. The AO in his demand report states that the order dated 31.03.2010 of rectification under Section 154 of the Act modified the figure to Rs.15,61,828/ relief of Rs.7,88,734/ attributable to assets not put in use.” IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA Date M/s Vishal Paper Industries Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ITA Date of Decision: 17.09 M/s Vishal Paper Industries Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHIST Ms. Radhika Suri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate for the appellant(s). Mr. Amanpreet (A.P.), Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for the respondent. *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) Both the counsel are ad-idem present appeals stands finally adjudicated by this Court in ITA decided on 02.04.2024. This Court in ITA-194-2012, examined the issue relating to the interest part and passed the following order:- “Thus, it was pointed out that there is a mistake in the ca done by the AO. The AO in his demand report states that the order dated 31.03.2010 of rectification under Section 154 of the Act modified the figure to Rs.15,61,828/ relief of Rs.7,88,734/- on account of interest attributable to assets not put in use.” IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA-394-2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.09.2024 …Appellant …Respondent ITA-484-2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: 17.09.2024 …Appellant of Income Tax, Patiala …Respondent HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA SANJAY VASHISTH Ms. Radhika Suri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhinav Narang, Advocate for the appellant(s). Sr. Standing Counsel SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J.(Oral) that the issue involved in the stands finally adjudicated by this Court in ITA-194-2012, 2012, examined the issue relating to the “Thus, it was pointed out that there is a mistake in the calculation done by the AO. The AO in his demand report states that the order dated 31.03.2010 of rectification under Section 154 of the Act modified the figure to Rs.15,61,828/- and the appellant was allowed a on account of interest on borrowed capital attributable to assets not put in use.” that the issue involved in the 2012, 2012, examined the issue relating to the lculation done by the AO. The AO in his demand report states that the order dated 31.03.2010 of rectification under Section 154 of the Act and the appellant was allowed a on borrowed capital RAJESH KUMAR 2024.09.18 14:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. ITA-394-2014 (O&M) and connected case. [2] 3. Similar mistake is found to have been committed in the present appeals for the AY: 2008-09 and 2009-10. 4. Keeping in view that we have passed the aforesaid order in relation to AY: 2007-08, the order passed on 02.04.2024, in ITA-194-2012, shall apply mutatis mutandis for the AY: 2008-09 and 2009-10. 5. The appeals are accordingly disposed of. 6. All pending applications also stand disposed of accordingly. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE (SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 17.09.2024 rajesh 1. Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/No 2. Whether reportable? : Yes/No RAJESH KUMAR 2024.09.18 14:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. "