COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-XVI vs. MR. ROBERT MICHAEL ARTHEY C/o PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS (P) LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA-459/2008HC Delhi2011:DHC:668023 December 20116 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

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?

Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show 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.

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

3.

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

11.

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

15.

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

All 10,214 judgments and leading authorities on Section 234B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →