DILIP S. DAHANUKAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 12(3)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5601/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 December 2016AY 1996-973 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the quantum appeal first before adjudicating on the levy of interest. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application under section 154 for rectification of interest levied under section 234B was dismissed by the AO and subsequently by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that the quantum additions, which formed the basis for the interest, were still pending before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether interest under section 234B can be levied and confirmed when the underlying additions are still under appeal. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the section 154 application without deciding the quantum appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir J. Mehta, A.R
For Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru, D.R
Hearing: 23.12.2016Pronounced: 23.12.2016

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 08.07.2014 vide which the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] has dismissed the appeal of the assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) dated 13.02.12 dismissing the application of the assessee moved under section 154 of the Act. The AO has dismissed the application of the assessee against the levy of interest under section 234B of the Act in relation to the additions made during the assessment proceedings.

2.

At the outset, the Ld. A.R. of the assessee has brought our attention to the order of the Tribunal dated 18.07.12 in vide which the Tribunal in relation to the quantum proceedings has restored the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. A.R., therefore, has submitted that before

2 Mr. Dilip S. Dahanukar deciding the appeal of the assessee in relation to levy of interest under section 234B, it was incumbent upon the Ld. CIT(A) to first decide the validity of the quantum additions. The Ld. A.R. has further submitted that the matter in the quantum appeal is pending before the Ld. CIT(A) for the last about four years. He, therefore, has requested that the matter relating to the levy of interest is to be decided along with the appeal of the assessee challenging the quantum additions.

3.

We find force in the above contentions of the Ld. A.R. The question of levy of interest will arise only if the additions will be sustained. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have decided the quantum appeal first, then to decide the question of levy of interest. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is therefore set aside and this appeal is accordingly restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the present appeal along with the quantum appeal restored by the Tribunal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 18.07.12. Needless to say that the Ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present his case. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to dispose of both the appeals at the earliest possible and preferably within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4.

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23.12.2016.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →