No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM
O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 21.06.2017 and pertains to the assessment year 1999- 2000.
The grounds of appeal read as under:
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to adjust the refund granted, first towards interest amount refundable and thereafter consider the balance against the tax amount refundable which will lead to excess grant of interest, contrary to the Legislative provision and law which is regularly followed by the Department.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) was rjght in directing the AO to allow interest on refund arising on account of double taxation relief interest without appreciating the fact that the assesse is not 2 M/s. State Bank of India entitled for refund out of credit for DTR and hence no interest u/s 244A is allowable 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing to compute interest u/s 244A of I T. Act from first day of April of Assessment year upto to date of granting of refund without appreciating the fact that refund had not become due to the assessee out of advance tax payment or TDS but has arisen out of voluntary payment by assessee on going effect to the order of Ld. CIT(A) wherein for the first time claim of deduction on account of interest on securities was made and allowed.
At the outset, it is noted that the impugned order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in this case was passed upon the Assessing Officer’s order dated 30.07.2012 which was an order giving effect to the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax’s order u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Upon hearing both the counsel and perusing the records, it transpires that this tribunal in for assessment year 1999-2000 has cancelled the order passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax u/s. 263 vide order dated 14.07.2017. Since the ITAT has quashed the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, the order giving effect passed by the Assessing Officer in this regard does not survive. Hence, in our considered opinion, this appeal by the Revenue becomes infructuous. Both the counsel fairly agreed to this proposition.
In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced in the open court on05.09.2018