Calcutta High Court
C.I.T vs M/S. Sppl Property Management P.Ltd on 3 December, 2010
Author: Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
Bench: Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta
ITA No. 235 OF 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)
ORIGINAL SIDE
C.I.T., KOLKATA-I
Versus
M/S. SPPL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT P.LTD.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA
The Hon'ble JUSTICE KANCHAN CHAKRABORTY
Date : 3rd December, 2010.
The Court :- The Learned Counsel for the appellant wants us to admit
the appeal on the following questions formulated by the appellant ;-
i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the
Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in
confirming the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)
directing the Assessing Officer to grant interest on interest under
Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating
the fact that when there is no refund there is no interest under
Section 244A payable to the respondent/Assessee ?
ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in directing the Assessing Officer to grant interest on interest following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. C.I.T. 280 ITR 643 without appreciating the fact that for 2 the Assessment year 2006-2007 this interest due to the assessee under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was granted automatically at the time of issue of the refund voucher consequent to the assessment made under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on November 21, 2007 and there was no urtholding or the amount of interest due under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?
iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in directing the Assessing Officer to follow the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. C.I.T. 280 ITR 643 for Assessment Year 2006-2007 without appreciating the fact that when the relevant Section 214, 243 and 244 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which were examined and considered in the said decision do not exist in the stature w.e.f. 1.4.1989 and the relevant provision of section 244A applicable for Assessment Year 2006-2007 have not been considered and analyzed to examine the applicability of the said decision ?
iv) Whether the impugned order is perverse and the same is nothing but the result of total non application of mind of the concerned Respondent ?
We have gone through the impugned judgment and order of the Learned Tribunal. We are unable to admit the appeal for the reason that the assessee's assessment for the assessment year 2006-07 was completed by the assessing officer who found that on account of tax deduction at source some excess amount of tax was liable to be refunded. The Assessing Officer after having held so refunded half of the refundable amount. On appeal being taken by the assessee to the C.I.T. he granted full relief directing the assessing officer to grant full refund and direction was given to recompute the amount of interest as per Supreme Court decision in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd. Vs. C.I.T. reported in 280 ITR 643 Supreme Court. Against the 3 direction of computation of interest in terms of Supreme Court Judgment the revenue went to the Learned Tribunal on appeal. The Learned Tribunal has in our view correctly recorded that no interference is called for as admitted position is that some amount of tax collected, is liable to be refunded. Then obviously under the law interest has to be paid. Therefore, there cannot be any dispute either in fact or in law. Hence, we are of the view that no question of law far less of substantial question of law is involved in this matter.
Therefore, this appeal is dismissed.
All parties are to act on a signed photostat copy of this order on the usual undertakings.
(KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA, J.) (KANCHAN CHAKRABORTY, J.) GH.