Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4756 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
10 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date
11-08-2016
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Bench Allotted
D
Next Hearing Date
01-07-2016
Assessment Year
2001-2002
Appeal Filed On
06-10-2015
Judgement Text
, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL D BENCH, CHENNAI , . ' # , $ #% BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.NOS. 202 TO 204/MDS/2015 (IN ITA NOS. 1496 TO 1498/MDS/2014) / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 TO 2002-03 ANSALDO ENERGIA SPA, C/O ERNST & YOUNG LLP, 6 TH & 7 TH FLOOR, A BLOCK, 4, RAJIV GANDHI SALAI, TARAMANI, CHENNAI -600113. PAN AACCA 4151H (APPLICANT) V. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME- TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), CHENNAI 34. RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : SHRI N.V.BALAJI, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 01.07.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.08.2016 & / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS, THE ASSESSEE SEEKS RECTIFICATION OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 17.7.2015 IN ITA NOS. 1496 TO 1498/MDS/2014. - - MA 202 TO 204/15 2 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THA T IN VIEW OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN AS SESSEES OWN CASE DATED 20.4.2016 IN TAX CASE APPEALS NOS. 19 TO 21 OF 2016, THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS HAVE BECOME INFRUCTU OUS. 3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. ADMITTEDLY, TH E ISSUE IN DISPUTE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL WAS SUBJECT MATTER BEF ORE THE HIGH COURT. THE HIGH COURT AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, HELD AS UNDER : 25. FOR A MOMENT, WE WILL KEEP ASIDE THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT IN TATA CHEMICALS AND HAVE A PLAIN LO OK AT SECTION 244-A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT. UNDER SUB-SEC TION (1) OF SECTION 244-A, AN ASSESSEE IS MADE ENTITLED TO R ECEIVE IN ADDITION TO ANY AMOUNT OF REFUND THAT HAS BECOME DU E TO HIM, SIMPLE INTEREST CALCULATED IN THE MANNER PROVI DED THEREIN. SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 244-A USES TWO IMPORTANT EXPRESSIONS, NAMELY (I) BECOMES DUE, AND (II) BE ENTITLED TO. THE EXPRESSION BECOMES DUE IS A CLE AR INDICATION THAT AN ASSESSEE WILL BE ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 244-A ONLY IF THE REFUND OF ANY AMOUNT HAS BECOME DUE. IF A REFUND HAS BECOME DUE, INTEREST ON THE R EFUND IS ALSO AUTOMATIC SUBJECT TO THE SATISFACTION OF OTHER CONDITIONS. ANYTHING THAT IS DUE AND WHICH A PERSON IS ENTITLED TO COLLECT, IS NATURALLY IN THE NATURE OF A DEBT CLAIM. THERE FORE, WE DO NOT THINK THAT HE SUPREME COURT MADE A VERY STRAY OBSERVATION IN PARAGRAPH 38 OF ITS DECISION IN TATA CHEMICALS, WITHOUT REALIZING WHAT THEY WERE ACTUALL Y INDICATING. THE STATEMENT FOUND IN PARAGRAPH 38 OF THE DECISION IN TATA CHEMICALS TO THE EFFECT REFUND DU E AND PAYABLE TO THE ASSESSEE IS DEBT-OWED PAYABLE BY THE REVENUE IS ACTUALLY A PERFECT STATEMENT OF LAW. I T IS CERTAINLY A THEOREM, BUT NOT EUCLIDS THEOREM. THEREFORE, TH E LAW AS WE SEE IS WELL SETTLED TO THE EFFECT THAT WHAT WAS DUE AS A - - MA 202 TO 204/15 3 REFUND AND WHAT WAS PAYABLE AS INTEREST ON SUCH REF UND ARE DEBT CLAIMS WITHIN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 12.4. AS A CONSEQUENCE, THEY SATISFY THE PARAMETERS OF ARTICLE 12.3(A). HENCE, THE FIRST QUESTION OF LAW IS ANSWERED IN FAV OUR OF THE APPELLANT. CONSEQUENTLY, THE SECOND QUESTION OF LA W DOES NOT ARISE FOR CONSIDERATION. THE APPEAL STANDS ALL OWED. IN VIEW OF THIS, THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE I N THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS DO NOT SURVIVE AND WE DISMISS THE SAME AS INFRUCTUOUS. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATIONS ARE DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THURSDAY, THE 11 TH OF AUGUST, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( !'# $ ) %&'(')*+,'-. /0')1-'&223'-4. 567 /JUDICIAL MEMBER 89 67:;;2+)<')<=>,?>- !95 /CHENNAI, @6' /DATED, THE 11 TH AUGUST, 2016. MPO* A69B C8DEF9D /COPY TO: 1. E8 /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. AA G E8. /CIT(A) 4. AA G /CIT 5. DHI J /DR 6. IKL8 /GF.
Mehul