COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I LUDHIANA vs. M/S VARDHMAN POLYTEX LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/162/2012HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01099230201224 July 2013Bench: MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA,MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the question of law raised in the appeal had already been decided by this Court in ITA No.33 of 2011, titled The Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Anand Concast Ltd., decided on January 27, 2011. In light of this prior ruling, which was against the revenue, the present appeal did not require further consideration. The Court answered the framed question of law in terms of its order in the Anand Concast Ltd. case. Consequently, the appeal filed by the revenue was dismissed. No specific findings were made on the merits of the present case, as it was disposed of based on precedent.

What were the facts?

The revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana, has appealed an order dated November 25, 2011, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench 'B'. The appeal concerns the assessee, M/s Vardhman Polytex Ltd., Ludhiana. The core of the dispute revolves around the charging of interest under Section 234D of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who had directed the Assessing Officer not to charge this interest. The revenue's appeal to the High Court challenges the ITAT's justification for accepting the CIT(A)'s direction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in accepting the decision of the CIT(A) who directed the Assessing Officer not to charge interest under Section 234D, despite it being chargeable in all decisions of the Assessing Officer taken with effect from June 1, 2003, irrespective of the Assessment Year? Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded. Revenue's Contentions: The revenue argued that interest under Section 234D is chargeable in all decisions of the Assessing Officer taken from June 1, 2003, onwards, regardless of the assessment year. They relied on the general applicability of the provision. The revenue's counsel conceded that this specific question of law had already been answered by the High Court in a previous case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No.162 of 2012 (O&M) -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ITA No.162 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision: July 24, 2013. Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana ... Appellant v. M/s Vardhman Polytex Ltd., Ludhiana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. BHARAT BHUSHAN PARSOON Present: Shri Rajesh Katoch, Advocate, for the appellant. Shri Alok Mittal, Advocate for the respondent. Rajive Bhalla

, J. (Oral): The revenue has laid challenge to order dated 25.11.2011 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B', Chandigarh. Notice in the appeal was issued on the following question of law:- “Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in accepting the decision of CIT (A) who directed the Assessing Officer not to charge interest u/s 234D despite of the fact that it is chargeable in all decisions of Assessing Officer taken w.e.f. 01.06.2003 irrespective of the Assessment Year.” Kadyan Vinod Kumar 2013.07.26 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

ITA No.162 of 2012 (O&M) -: 2 :- Counsel for the appellant fairly concedes that the said question has already been answered by this Court, in ITA No.33 of 2011, The Commissioner of Income Tax. v. M/s Anand Concast Ltd., decided on 27.1.2011. In view of the statement made by counsel for the revenue, as the question of law has already been answered against the revenue, the appeal does not call for further consideration. The question of law, so framed, is answered in terms of order dated 27.1.2011, passed in ITA No.33 of 2011, The Commissioner of Income Tax. v. M/s Anand Concast Ltd., and the appeal is dismissed.

[ Rajive Bhalla ]

Judge

[Dr. Bharat Bhushan Parsoon] July 24, 2013. Judge kadyan Kadyan Vinod Kumar 2013.07.26 10:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

More judgments on Section 234D

All 2,105 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234D →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →