PR CIT -3 vs. EASTERN INDIA POWERTECH LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS DLF POWER LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/667/2016HC DelhiDLHC01116612201602 September 2016Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the ITAT's decision was justified, considering that three other High Courts had already ruled out the applicability of Section 234B in similar circumstances. Therefore, no substantial question of law arose.

What were the facts?

The revenue sought to apply Section 234B for interest recovery on additions made due to a retrospective amendment concerning book profit computation. This amendment was introduced by the Finance Act 2009, effective from April 1, 2001.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether Section 234B, concerning interest on default in payment of advance tax, could be applied to additions made to book profit due to a retrospective amendment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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.

$~18,19 & 22 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

ITA 663/2016, CM Nos. 31877-31878/2016

PR. CIT -3

..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roychaudhry, Sr. Standing Counsel along with Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel.

versus EASTERN INDIA POWER LTD ( EARLIER KNOWN AS DLF POWER LTD.)

..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocate along with Mr. Bhuwan Dhupar, Advocate.

And

ITA 664/2016, CM Nos. 31879-31880/2016

PR. CIT-3

..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roychaudhry, Sr. Standing Counsel along with Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel.

versus EASTERN POWERTECH LTD. EARLIER KNOW AS DLF POWER LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocate along with Mr. Bhuwan Dhupar, Advocate.

And + ITA 667/2016, CM Nos. 31884-31885/2016

PR CIT -3

..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roychaudhry, Sr. Standing Counsel along with Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra, Jr. Standing Counsel.

versus EASTERN INDIA POWERTECH LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS DLF POWER LTD.

..... Respondent Through: Ms. Kavita Jha, Advocate along with Mr. Bhuwan Dhupar, Advocate.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA

O R D E R %

02.09.2016

The question of law sought to be urged in these appeals is as to the applicability of Section 234B, in regard to the additions made, pursuant to the retrospective amendment (brought into force by Finance Act 2009 with retrospective effect from 01.04.2001), by inclusion of various items in computing book profit. On the basis of the retrospective amendment, the revenue sought to apply Section 234B of the Income Tax Act for recovery of the interest upon the amount being payable. It was brought to the notice of the Court that the applicability of Section 234B in these very circumstances has been ruled out by three other High Courts i.e. Bombay High Court [Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai vs. JSW Energy Ltd. (2015) 379 ITR 36], Calcutta High Court [Emami Ltd. vs. CIT (2011) 337 ITR 470/200 Taxmann 326/12 taxxmann.com 64(Cal.)] and Karnataka High Court [Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jupiter Bio Science Ltd. (2013) 352 ITR 113].

This court is of the opinion that the decision of the ITAT, in the circumstances, was justified and therefore no question of law arises.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

DEEPA SHARMA, J SEPTEMBER 02, 2016/sapna

More judgments on Section 234B

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →