COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XVI vs. MR. ROBERT MICHAEL ARTHEY
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that no substantial question of law arises as the issue is concluded by a previous Division Bench judgment. The appeals were also not entertainable due to low tax effect and lack of cascading effect, as per CBDT guidelines.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer charged interest under Section 234B and 234C for non-payment of advance tax. The CIT(A) and ITAT set aside this order, holding that the assessee had no liability as their entire income was subject to tax at source.
What were the issues?
Whether interest under Section 234B and 234C is leviable when the entire income is subject to tax at source. Whether appeals with low tax effect and no cascading effect are entertainable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- DIT v. Jacobs Civil Incorporated17 citing194 Taxmann 495 · 2010 · HC
ITA No.459/2008,,337/2007,338/2007,131/2009 Page 1 of 6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI +
ITA 459 of 2008 ITA 337 of 2007 ITA 338 of 2007 ITA 131 of 2009
JUDGMENT RESERVED ON:22.7.2011 JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON:23.12.2011
(1)
ITA 459 of 2008
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XVI ..... APPELLANT Through: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate. Versus
MR. ROBERT MICHAEL ARTHEY C/o PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS (P) LTD.
..RESPONDENT Through: Mr.Sudeep Bhandari, Advocate.
(2) ITA 337 OF 2007
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XVI ..... APPELLANT Through: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate. Versus
MR.LESTNER GARNETT
. ..RESPONDENT Through: Mr.Sudeep Bhandari, Advocate.
(3) ITA 338 OF 2007
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XVI ..... APPELLANT Through: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate. 2011:DHC:6680-DB
ITA No.459/2008,,337/2007,338/2007,131/2009 Page 2 of 6
Versus
MR.LESTNER GARNETT
. ..RESPONDENT Through: Mr.Sudeep Bhandari, Advocate.
(4)
ITA 131 OF 2009
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XVI ..... APPELLANT Through: Ms. Rashmi Chopra, Advocate. Versus
MR. VIJAY GOPAL JINDAL
. ..RESPONDENT Through: Mr.Sudeep Bhandari, Advocate.
CORAM: HON’BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL
A.K.SIKRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE:
ITA No. 459 of 2008 1. Order in this appeal was reserved alongwith ITA 504/2007 and other connected matters since issue of charging of interest under Section 234-B of the Income-Tax Act had arisen in those appeals also. 2 Vide separate order passed today, the issue is decided in favour of the assessee. 2011:DHC:6680-DB
ITA No.459/2008,,337/2007,338/2007,131/2009 Page 3 of 6
That apart, we find that the tax effect in this appeal is ` 4,79,170/- and in view of the latest guidelines of the CBDT, the appeal is otherwise not entertainable when we find that the issue does not have cascading effect. 4. It would be worthwhile to mention that the interest was charged under the aforesaid provision by the Assessing Officer on the ground that advance tax was not paid. This order was set aside by the CIT (A) and the order of the CIT(A) has been affirmed by the ITAT holding that the assessee had no liability to pay advance tax in view of the fact that his entire income was subject to tax at source. 5. This issue also stands concluded by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Director of Income-Tax Vs. Jacab Civil Incorporated [2010] 194 TAXMAN 495. 6. Thus, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed. 2011:DHC:6680-DB
ITA No.459/2008,,337/2007,338/2007,131/2009 Page 4 of 6
ITA No. 337/2007 & ITA 338/2007 7. Order in this appeal was reserved alongwith ITA 504/2007 and other connected matters since issue of charging of interest under Section 234-B of the Income-Tax Act had arisen in those appeals also. 8. Vide separate order passed today, the issue is decided in favour of the assessee. 9. That apart, we find that the tax effect in this appeal is much less than ` 4 lacs and in view of the latest guidelines of the CBDT, the appeal is otherwise not entertainable when we find that the issue does not have cascading effect. 10. It would be worthwhile to mention that the interest was charged under the aforesaid provision by the Assessing Officer on the ground that advance tax was not paid. This order was set aside by the ITAT holding that the assessee had no liability to pay advance tax in view of the fact that his entire income was subject to tax at source. 2011:DHC:6680-DB
ITA No.459/2008,,337/2007,338/2007,131/2009 Page 5 of 6
This issue also stands concluded by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Director of Income-Tax Vs. Jacab Civil Incorporated [2010] 194 TAXMAN 495. 12. Thus, no substantial question of law arises in these appeals which are accordingly dismissed. ITA No. 131/2009 13. Order in this appeal was reserved alongwith ITA 504/2007 and other connected matters since issue of charging of interest under Section 234-B of the Income-Tax Act had arisen in those appeals also. 14. It would be worthwhile to mention that the interest of ` 2,90,403/- and `3,56,637/- respectively was charged under Section 234-B & C of the Income-Tax Act by the Assessing Officer on the ground that advance tax was not paid. This order was set aside by the CIT (A) and the order of the CIT(A) has been affirmed by the ITAT holding that the assessee had no liability to pay advance tax in view of the fact that his entire income was subject to tax at source. 2011:DHC:6680-DB
ITA No.459/2008,,337/2007,338/2007,131/2009 Page 6 of 6
This issue also stands concluded by a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Director of Income-Tax Vs. Jacab Civil Incorporated [2010] 194 TAXMAN 495. 16. Thus, no substantial question of law arises in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(REVA KHETRAPAL)
JUDGE DECEMBER 23, 2011 skb 2011:DHC:6680-DB
More judgments on Section 234B
- Vikas Ashokkumar Masand, Ahmedabad vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3130/AHD/2026[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Shalin Jayantbhai Desai, Vadodara vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), Vadodara Present…ITA 2569/AHD/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2010-11
- Sarvjeet Singh Through Legal Heir Manjit… vs ITO Ward 1(1), AlwarITA 355/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2128/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026