COMMR. vs. MS.HIMACHAL FUTURISTICS

PDF · subscribers
ITA/22/2003HC Himachal PradeshHPHC01003508200310 December 2009Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHARMA,HONRABLE MR. JUSTICE R.B. MISRA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal had already been answered by a Division Bench of the same Court in Commissioner of Income Tax versus United Vanaspati Ltd. (2008) 218 CTR (H)) 524. The Court stated it was bound by the judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench. Consequently, the appeal was allowed. The assessee was held liable to pay interest under sections 234-B and 234-C of the Income Tax Act. The substantial questions of law were answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. No issues were expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

This Indian ITAT judgment concerns an appeal filed by the revenue against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The assessment year(s) are not explicitly stated. The order under challenge is the ITAT's deletion of interest charged under sections 234-B and 234-C of the Income Tax Act. The procedural history involves the appeal being admitted on substantial questions of law. The present judgment is from the High Court, not the ITAT itself, and it refers to a previous Division Bench judgment of the same High Court.

What were the issues?

1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal misinterpreted and misconstrued the facts, on record and provisions of sections 234-B and 234-C of the I.T. Act? (Question of law and fact, concerning Sections 234-B and 234-C). 2. Whether the ld. ITAT erred in deleting the interest charged under these sections, since the same is mandatory? (Question of law, concerning Sections 234-B and 234-C). Assessee's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's contentions: The revenue argued that the ITAT erred in deleting the interest charged under sections 234-B and 234-C, as such interest is mandatory. The revenue relied on the judgment in Commissioner of Income Tax versus United Vanaspati Ltd. (2008) 218 CTR (H)) 524.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234-B,Section 234-C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA No. 22/2003

10.12.2009: Present: Mrs. Vandana Kuthiala, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. R.P. Rastogi with Mr. Raman Sethi, Advocates for the respondent.

This appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: A) “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal misinterpreted and misconstrued the facts, on record and provisions of sections 234-B and 234-C of the I.T. Act? B) Whether the ld. ITAT erred in deleting the interest charged under these sections, since the same is mandatory?”

The substantial questions of law raised in this appeal have already been answered by a Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax versus United Vanaspati Ltd. (2008) 218 CTR (H)) 524. We are bound by the judgment rendered by a Coordinate Bench. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The assessee is held liable to pay interest under sections 234-B and 234-C of the Income Tax Act. The substantial questions of law are answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.

(R.B. Misra), Acting Chief Justice.

(Rajiv Sharma),

Judge.

10.12. 2009.

*awasthi*

More judgments on Section 234-B

All 50 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234-B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →