DCIT CEN CIR 1(4), MUMBAI V. GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

MA 170/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4430 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 08-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-08-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘G‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No.169/Mum/2021 (Arising out of ITA No.473/Mum/2016 (Asse ssment Year :2007-08) & M.A. No.170/Mum/2021 (Arising out of ITA No.474/Mum/2016 (Asse ssment Year :2008-09) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(4) Mumbai, 9 th Floor 902, Pratishtha Bhavan Old CGO Building (Annexe) M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Vs. M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., Corporate Finance Division A-2, Aditya Birla Centre S.K.Ahire Marg Worli, Mumbai-400030 PAN/GIR No.AAACG4464B (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri Mehul Jain Assessee by Shri Yogesh Thar Date of Hearing 17/12/2021 Date of Pronouncement 09/05/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): By virtue of these Miscellaneous Applications, the Revenue seeks to recall the order passed by this Tribunal on 11/11/2020 on the ground that the Tribunal had passed an order granting interest on interest on refund u/s.244A of the Act. In the opinion of the Revenue, this decision is in total contrast to the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case MA No. 169 & 170/Mum/2021 M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., 2 of CIT vs. Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals reported in 24 taxmann.com 338 and Sandvik Asia Ltd., vs. CIT reported in 150 Taxman 591. The Revenue also placed reliance on some other High Court decisions in support of its contentions. Accordingly, it sought recall of the order to consider the matter afresh. 2. We have gone through the Miscellaneous Applications of the Revenue and the order passed by this Tribunal. We have gone through the decisions relied upon by the Revenue in its Miscellaneous Applications. We find that assessee in the instant case had not asked for interest on interest on refunds at all; neither it is granted by this Tribunal in its order. Hence, there is absolutely no error in the order passed by this Tribunal and to this extent the Miscellaneous Applications of the Revenue are totally misconceived. The entire decisions relied upon by the ld. DR have been duly considered in the decisions of Union Bank of India rendered by this Mumbai Tribunal. While disposing of the present appeals of the assessee, this Tribunal had placed reliance on the decisions of Union Bank of India reported in 162 ITD 142. We find that this Tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India dated 11/08/2016 referred to supra had elaborately considered all the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and other High Courts and had rendered the decision in favour of the assessee and this decision has been placed reliance by this Tribunal in the case of the assessee before us. Hence, we do not find any infirmity at all in the order passed by this Tribunal and we also hold that there is absolutely no error in the said order passed by this Tribunal dated 11/11/2020. We find that the Revenue is only trying to seek a review in the guise of rectification which is not permissible in law u/s.254(2) of the Act. Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Applications of the Revenue are dismissed. MA No. 169 & 170/Mum/2021 M/s. Grasim Industries Ltd., 3 3. In the result, Miscellaneous Applications of the Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced on 09/05/2022 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board. Sd/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) Sd/- (M.BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 09/05/2022 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy//