ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S MODIPON LIMITED, UTTAR PRADESH
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 the Assessing Officer must correctly implement appellate directions. It also found no basis for charging interest under Section 217 as the Assessing Officer had previously dropped penalty proceedings for non-payment of advance tax.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning Assessment Year 1986-87. The core issue was the Assessing Officer's failure to correctly give appeal effect to previous appellate orders, impacting deductions and expenses.
What were the issues?
Whether the Assessing Officer correctly gave appeal effect to prior appellate orders, and whether interest under Section 217 was leviable when advance tax was not payable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 80VVA,Section 217,Section 209
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
This appeal by the revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-VIII, New Delhi dated 14.11.2014 pertaining to A. Y. 1986-87. 2. The grievance of the revenue read :- 1. “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing to allow the deduction under section 80VVA of the I. T. Act, 1961?
Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring that the deduction was not allowed by the AO when the appeal effect was given in both the A. Y. i.e. 1985-86 dated 31.07.2001 ? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made on account of Guest House Expenses in context of Hon’ble High Court order? 4. Whether on the fact and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting charge of interest under section 217 of the Act ? 5. Whether on the fact and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring that the interest was charged at the time of completing of assessment u/s. 143 (3) of the IT Act, 1961 ? 6. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law.”
The bone of contention is the order giving appeal effect to the appellate orders by the Assessing Officer. While giving the appeal effect the Assessing Officer did not consider the relief given by the appellate authorities which prompted the assessee to carry the matter before the CIT(A).
The CIT(A) after considering the appellate orders which were subject matter of appeal effect found that the claim of deduction u/s. 80 VVA of the Act needs to be allowed on the correct amount of incentives. Similar directions were given for the allowability of guest house expenses. 5. We do not find any error or infirmity in the such directions of the CIT(A) because in any case the Assessing Officer ought to have given appeal effect correctly as per the findings of the appellate authority. Grounds No.1 to 3 taken together are dismissed. 6. In so far as charging of interest u/s. 217 is concerned, order u/s. 273 of the Act for the assessment year 1986-87 which is placed at page 68 of the paper book clearly show that the Assessing Officer has dropped the penalty proceedings clearly holding that no advance tax was payable as per provisions of section 209 of the Act. As the Assessing Officer himself has accepted that there was no liability to pay advance tax, we are of the considered view that there is no case for charging interest u/s. 217 of the Act. Ground No.4 is accordingly dismissed. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02.07.2019.
More judgments on Section 217
- Suriender Jain, New Delhi vs Prcit-13, New DelhiITA 3038/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2024AY 2011-12
- Suriender Jain, New Delhi vs Prcit-13, New DelhiITA 3037/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2024AY 2010-11
- Suriender Jain, New Delhi vs Prcit-13, New DelhiITA 3036/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: Disposed12 Mar 2024AY 2009-10
- Everest Organics Ltd vs The Commissioner of I.T., HyderabadITTA/9/200521 Sept 2022
- Neelachal I.Nigam L vs Asst.Comnr.of I.TaxITA/8/200517 Nov 2021
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026