Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. H.S. SIDHU & SH. T.S. KAPOOR
Date of hearing 17.07.2018 Date of pronouncement 17.07.2018 ORDER PER T.S. KAPOOR, A.M.: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-29, New Delhi, dated 12.06.2015, for the assessment year 2010-11.
At the outset, the learned AR invited our attention to the order of the ITAT for assessment year 2009-10 in the case of assessee itself and submitted that the issue in dispute has been decided by the Tribunal against the assessee.
Learned DR also stated that the issue has already been adjudicated by the Tribunal and it is against the assessee.
We have heard the rival contentions of the parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We also find that the Tribunal, vide order dated 27th April, 2018 in assessee’s own case (ITA No. 5063/Del/2015 for AY: 2009-10), has decided the issue of levy of interest under Section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by holding as under: “5. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions on either side. Insofar as facts are concerned, absolutely, there is no dispute. Subsequent to the search operations, the assessee and the group concerns filed an application before the ITSC u/s 245D(1) on 16.11.2011 and the ITSC passed an order in all the group concern cases u/s 245D(4) on 25.9.2013. Department gave effect to the said order of the ITSC by passing order dated 2.7.2013 where under the interest was levied u/s 234B(1). Assessee sought rectification of the same by application u/s 154 of the Act and it was rejected.
6. There is no dispute that there was no order passed u/s 147 or 153A/153C of the Act. Assessee failed to demonstrate before us that the learned CIT(A) committed any error in his observation that in all the decisions relied upon by the assessee there was re-assessment framed u/s 147 or 153A of the Act and not u/s 245 of the Act. So also it is not the contention of the assessee that in Omaxe Auto case(supra), the assessee had computed the interest u/s 234B(3) of the Act and 234B(1) of the Act. Further the chargeability of interest u/s 234B(1) of 234B(3) had not cropped up for consideration of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Brij Lai (supra). It, therefore, goes without saying that learned CIT(A) was perfectly right in observing that the Hon'ble Apex Court had not altered the principle laid down in the case of Hindustan Bulk Carrier (supra) and he had rightly followed the same. We, therefore, do not find any illegality or irregularity in the orders of the Id. CIT(A). The ground of appeal, therefore, fail and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.”
Finding facts of the present case are pari materia to the order passed by the Tribunal in assessee’s case (supra), therefore, respectfully following the above case, we dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
The decision is pronounced in the open court on 17th July, 2018.