INTERGLOBE TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD.,GURUGRAM vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-10(2), NEW DELHI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to dismiss the appeal. The CIT(A) found the appeal defective because it was filed beyond the prescribed time limit and the grievance regarding interest under Section 244A did not arise directly from the assessment order.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning the computation of interest under Section 244A of the Income Tax Act for AY 2013-14. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the appeal was decided ex parte.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal filed by the assessee was maintainable and whether the grievance regarding interest under Section 244A arose directly from the assessment order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI
Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA
Assessment Year: 2013-14 Interglobe Technologies DCIT Pvt. Ltd., Block-3B, DLF Vs Circle -10 (2) Corporate park, DLF City, New Delhi Phase-III, Gurgaon-122002 PAN no.AAACI5079A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by None Respondent by Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 23/03/2023 Date of Pronouncement: 23/03/2023 ORDER
PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-4, New Delhi dated 30.08.2018 pertaining to A.Y.2013- 14.
The solitary grievance of the assessee is that the interest under 244A of the Act has been wrongly computed by the AO. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee inspite of several notices, therefore, we decided to proceed exparte. The DR was heard at length. Case records carefully perused. 4. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing as under :-
“6.4 The fact is that the appeal in actual pertains to and the grievance is arising from the refund issued to the appellant on May 23, 2017 in which as per appellant, the interest under Section 244A has been wrongly calculated. The issue is not with regard to the amount of refund determined as a result of order u/s 143(3) but with regard to the interest under Section 244Aof the Act that too for the period beyond the date of assessment order. Thus, the grievance of the appellant is not arising directly from the assessment order. The appeal has been filed against the order u/s 143(3) of the Act which was passed on 27th December,2016 but the date of order in Form 35 has been given as May 23, 2017, which is in actual the date of refund order. Even if the appeal is treated as filed against order u/s 143(3), the same has not been filed within prescribed time limit and is delayed. This fact of delayed filing of appeal has not been divulged in the Form -35 nor there is any application for condonation of delay. This makes the appeal defective. Furthermore, the plea of the appellant pertaining to interest under Section 244A of the Act for the period post the assessment order up till the receipt of refund voucher is not emanating from the assessment order; hence there is no cause of action.”
Since the appeal has been dismissed as defective by the first appellate authority, unless that defect is cured we do not find any merit in the appeal before us. The same is accordingly dismissed.
Decision announced in the open court on 23.03.2023.
More judgments on Section 244A
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(3), RajkotITA 366/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Shailesh Khodabhai Ramani, Rajkot vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(5), RajkotITA 257/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-12
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax…ITA 3453/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment… vs The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 6805/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Pratibha Sanjai Srivastava, Ahmedabad vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(2)(1), AhmedabadITA 2565/AHD/2026[2021-2022]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2021-2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026
- Salman vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 26 Oct 2026