CIT v. Pranoy Roy

Colin Mario Rebello, Mumbai vs. ITO., Ward-23(1)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2021-22 Colin Mario Rebello, Ito, 501-502, Building-1, Ward-23(1)(1), Joanna Co-Operative Mumbai Vs. Society Ltd, Manuel Gonsalves Road, Bandra West, Mumbai-400050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaar5626F

…t for the taxes paid in August 2021. 2. The learned Assessing Officer erred in charging excess interest of Rs. 1,15,930 under section 234A without 2 Colin Mario Rebello complying with the directions of the Hon. Supreme court in the case of CIT V. Prannoy Roy 309 ITR 231 (2009). 3. The learned Assessing Officer erred in charging excess interest under section 234A without fully appreciating the facts of the case and considering that the taxes have been paid so no compensatory interest can be charged under section 234A for the subsequent period. It is submitted that the constitutional validity of section 234A has b…

Dayanand Vaidik Vidyalaya Sachalak Samiti, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-(TDS)-CPC, Ghaziabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Ravish Sooddayanand Vaidik Vidyalalya Acit-(Tds)-Cpc Sanchalak Samiti. Aayakar Bhavan, A-11-5, Marigold Chs, Sector 3, Vaishali, Vs. Devidayal Road, Ghaziabad, Mulund West, Uttar Pradesh- 201010 Mumbai – 400 080 Pan – Aaatd7310G (Appellant) (Respondent)

…anand Vaidik Vidalaya Sanchalak Samiti Vs. ACIT-(TDS)-CPC date of payment of tax by the deductees, disregarding the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in: “Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2007) 163 Taxman 355 & CIT v. Pranoy Roy (2009) 309 ITR 231 (SC)” 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the levy of fees u/s 234E of Rs. 21,200/ - in respect of period prior to 01.06.2005, without any enabling provision in section 200A.” 2. Briefly stated, on account of short deduction of tax at source for the fourth quarter of the financial year 2014-…

Samosaran Yarns P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 1(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi: A.Y : 2014-15

…Cuttack Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Epari Sadasiva Rao (HUF) (supra), by referring to the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Dr. Prannoy Roy vs. CIT, 254 ITR 755 (Delhi) (which has since been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 309 ITR 231 (SC)) observed that the interest envisaged u/s 234A of the Act was not intended to be a penalty or punishment for delay in submission of return, but was compensatory in nature as the Revenue was deprived of timely payment of self-assessment tax. The Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of B.R. Machine Tools Pvt. Ltd. (supra) also noted that w…

M/S M.P. Recycling Co Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-6, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood(Jm)

…234A of the Act is chargeable on the amount of self assessment tax paid by the assessee before the due date of filing of return of income” We notice that the CBDT has followed the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Prannoy Roy (309 ITR 231). Accordingly, the Ld A.R prayed that the AO may be directed to re-compute the interest u/s 234A of the Act in accordance with the Circular referred above. 5. We heard Ld D.R, who submitted that the charging of interest u/s 234A is mandatory. 6. Having heard rival submissions, we are of the view that the issue relating to charging/computation o…