Gujarat High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax-I vs Indian Petrochemical Corporation ... on 19 July, 2016
Author: K.S.Jhaveri
Bench: Ks Jhaveri, G.R.Udhwani
O/TAXAP/1492/2008 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX APPEAL NO. 1492 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Sd/-
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed Yes
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of No
the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of No
law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
India or any order made thereunder ?
================================================================
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I,....Appellant(s)
Versus
INDIAN PETROCHEMICAL CORPORATION LTD.....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR SOPARKAR for MRS SWATI SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE for the
Opponent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI
Date : 19/07/2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
Page 1 of 4
HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:18:51 IST 2016 O/TAXAP/1492/2008 JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI)
1. By way of this appeal, the assessee has challenged the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench "A", Ahmedabad (For short, "the Tribunal") in ITA No.2055/Ahd/2007 dated 11.7.2007, whereby the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed.
2. At the time of admitting this Appeal, following question of law was framed:-
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in allowing interest u/s 244A(1)(b) on the refund of self-assessment tax, without appreciating that this provision does not provide for payment of interest on self-assessment tax?"
3. Mr.Parikh, learned advocate for the appellant submitted that considering the provisions of Section 244A (1) (b) of the Act, interest is not required to be refunded and the Tribunal has committed an error while passing the impugned. He, therefore, prayed that this appeal may also be disposed of accordingly.
4. On the other hand, Mr.Soparkar, learned advocate for the respondent submitted that the Tribunal has not committed any error while passing the impugned order. He has relied upon the observations made in paragraph 5 of the impugned order, wherein it is observed as under:-
"5. I have considered the rival submissions. I have perused the case law relied upon by the appellant. It is observed that the issue involved before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Modi Industries Ltd. (supra) covered only advance tax and TDS and there was no specific mention of the tax paid on self assessment u/s Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:18:51 IST 2016 O/TAXAP/1492/2008 JUDGMENT 140A. However, the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have been applied equally to any other tax paid, including the self assessment tax, by a large number of High Courts including the jurisdictional High Court of Gujarat. In the case of Gujarat State Warehousing Corpn (supra), the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in answer to question "whether the assessee is entitled to interest u/s 244 (1A) / 214 of payment of tax made u/s 140A of the IT Act, 1961?" held as under:-
"Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the controversy raised herein is concluded by the decision of the Apex Court in Modi Industries Ltd. v. CIT (1995), 216 ITR 759, as explained by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v. Hansa Agencies Pvt Ltd (1998), 234 ITR 271 and by the Karnataka High Court in CIT v NGEF Ltd (2000) 244 ITR 665.
We find no reason to take a different view. We, accordingly, answer the question in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue."
4.1 He submitted that the issue involved in this appeals is covered by the decision relied upon by the Tribunal in the case of CIT v. Gujarat State Warehousing Corpn. 256 ITR 596 (Guj). He, therefore, prays to dismiss this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant is not in a position to dispute the fact that the issue involved in this appeals is covered by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Gujarat State Warehousing Corpn. 256 ITR 596 (Guj). Therefore, we find that the Tribunal has not committed any error while passing the impugned order. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. The question posed for our consideration is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
Sd/-
Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:18:51 IST 2016 O/TAXAP/1492/2008 JUDGMENT (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) Sd/- (G.R.UDHWANI, J.) *malek Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Mon Jul 25 06:18:51 IST 2016