ACIT (LTU)-1, MUMBAI vs. UNION BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that since the issue was remitted back to the AO for verification and computation as per law, there was no prejudice to the Revenue. The AO was directed to follow the CIT(A)'s directions.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which remitted the issue of computation of interest under Section 244A back to the Assessing Officer (AO). The CIT(A) directed the AO to verify the assessee's computation of interest and allow appropriate relief in light of Section 244A and Rule 119A.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in remitting the computation of interest under Section 244A to the AO for verification and re-computation.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. The present appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2015-16 dated 05.11.2019 and arises out of assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). 2. Revenue is in appeal with the following grounds of appeal: Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case an in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in holding that ground raised in respect of computation of interest u/s 244A of the Act is allowed, having set aside the same to the file of the AO M/s Union Bank of India 2 with the direction to verify the computation of interest as computed by the assessee allowed to them and modify the interest u/s 244A to be allowed appropriately in the light of the provisions of section 244 r.w. Rule 119A of the Act.
3. At the time of hearing it is brought to our notice that the Ld. CIT(A) gave direction to the Assessing Officer for the sake of clarity it is reproduced below:
The AO has determined the refund by passing the order on 29.06.2018, and the interest u/s.244A should be allowed till the month of June-2018 in terms of Rule 119A(b) which provides that where interest has to be calculated for every month or part of a month comprised in a period, any fraction of a month shall be deemed to be a full month and interest shall be so calculated. The AO is directed to verify the computation of interest u/s.244A as computed by the appellant at Rs.271,93,001/- and at Rs.150,03,754/-, as allowed to the appellant vide order dated 29.06.2018. Further, the AO is directed to modify the interest u/s.244A to be allowed to the appellant appropriately, in light of the provisions of Sec.244A r.w. Rule 119A and allow appropriate relief.
4. Since the issue was remitted back to the AO to determine the interest u/s 244A of the Act with a clear direction by the Ld. CIT(A). However, Department is in appeal before us with the plea that interest u/s 244A of the Act is allowed and having set aside the same to the file of AO with a direction to verify the computation of interest as computed by the assessee.
More judgments on Section 244A
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), RajkotITA 366/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(5), RajkotITA 257/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 3453/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6805/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Pratibha Sanjai Srivastava, Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), AhmedabadITA 2565/AHD/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2021-2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026