India Trade Promotion Organisation v. CIT

361 ITR 646High Court2014#2145 most cited

What is India Trade Promotion Organisation v. CIT authority for?

When a refund is due to an assessee under Section 244A, the amount must first be adjusted towards the interest payable on such refund, with the balance then adjusted against the tax amount refundable. This follows the principle of Section 140A(1) and means "any amount" in Section 244A includes accrued interest.

54

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

India Trade Promotion Organisation v. CIT · Section 244A interest on refund · Section 140A(1) adjustment · computation of interest · priority of refund adjustment · meaning of "any amount" Section 244A · Rule 119A · interest on interest

Also reported as

38 Taxmann.com 233

Sections most often in play

Section 244ASection 143(3)Section 244A(1A)Section 254Section 140A(1)Section 154Section 251Section 10
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 140a(1)section 244a(1)section 140ainterest on interestinterest on refundsection 244section 140section 244aadvance taxsection 156section 220section 24

Judgments citing India Trade Promotion Organisation v. CIT

ACIT (Ltu-1), Mumbai vs. Idbi Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 835/MUM/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2003-04 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Idbi Bank Limited, Income Tax (Ltu-1), 6Th Floor, Idbi Tower, Colaba 29Th Floor, Center-1, World Trade Office, Cuffe Parade, Centre, Cuffee Parade, Vs. Mumbai - 400005 Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aabc18842G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Idbi Bank Ltd., The Dcit/Acit 22Nd Floor, Taxation Cell, Large Tax Payers Unit, 29Th Idbi Tower, Wtc Complex, Floor, Centre-1, Wtc Complex, Cuffe Parade, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai - 400005 Mumbai - 400005 Pan:Aaaci1603C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi (Dr) Assessee By : Shri C Naresh (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2021

For Appellant: Shri C Naresh (AR)For Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi (DR)
Section 154Section 244Section 244A

…sted against the interest component computed under section 244A of the Act and only thereafter it can be adjusted against the tax amount. In this context, he drew our attention to the following decisions:- 1. “India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (2014) 361 ITR 646 (Delhi) 2. Union Bank of India vs. ACIT (2016) 72 taxman.com 348. 3. Bank of Baroda vs. PCIT, ITA No. 1646/Mum/2017 dated 20.12.2018”. 4. Thus, he submitted, since more than one view is possible on the issue, it is not a rectifiable mistake under section 154 of the Act. He submitted, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law in holding that…

Idbi Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT (Ltu), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed and revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 777/MUM/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2003-04 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S Idbi Bank Limited, Income Tax (Ltu-1), 6Th Floor, Idbi Tower, Colaba 29Th Floor, Center-1, World Trade Office, Cuffe Parade, Centre, Cuffee Parade, Vs. Mumbai - 400005 Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aabc18842G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2003-04 Idbi Bank Ltd., The Dcit/Acit 22Nd Floor, Taxation Cell, Large Tax Payers Unit, 29Th Idbi Tower, Wtc Complex, Floor, Centre-1, Wtc Complex, Cuffe Parade, Vs. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai - 400005 Mumbai - 400005 Pan:Aaaci1603C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi (Dr) Assessee By : Shri C Naresh (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 18/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2021

For Appellant: Shri C Naresh (AR)For Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi (DR)
Section 154Section 244Section 244A

…sted against the interest component computed under section 244A of the Act and only thereafter it can be adjusted against the tax amount. In this context, he drew our attention to the following decisions:- 1. “India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (2014) 361 ITR 646 (Delhi) 2. Union Bank of India vs. ACIT (2016) 72 taxman.com 348. 3. Bank of Baroda vs. PCIT, ITA No. 1646/Mum/2017 dated 20.12.2018”. 4. Thus, he submitted, since more than one view is possible on the issue, it is not a rectifiable mistake under section 154 of the Act. He submitted, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law in holding that…

ACIT Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bank of India, Mumbai

ITA 5683/MUM/2019[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2021AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Acit, Circle - 2(1)(1), M/S Bank Of India Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, Vs. 8Th Floor, Star House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, C-5, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Mumbai – 400 020 Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051

For Appellant: Shri C. Naresh, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 250

…to the file of the A.O for deciding the same afresh in light of the decision of the Hon‟ble ITA No. 5683/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2001-02 3 ACIT, Circle 2(1)(1) Vs. M/s Bank of India High Court of Delhi in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization Vs. CIT, (2014) 361 ITR 646 (Del). 5. In the course of the set-aside proceedings, it was observed by the A.O that the claim of the assessee i.e the refund paid should be first adjusted against the interest and thereafter the balance amount of refund should be adjusted against the principal amount was not directly answered by the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of In…

ACIT, Circle -2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5233/MUM/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved
Section 156Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234CSection 244A

…t. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Ld.CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization v. CIT [361 ITR 646] and Mumbai ITA NOs. 4892 & 4893/MUM/2019 M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Tribunal decision in the case of Union Bank of India v. ACIT in ITA.No. 7589/Mum/2014, directed the Assessing Officer to compute interest u/s.244A as per the findings given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court observing as under: - “6.1.5. The Appellant placed reliance o…

ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5232/MUM/2019[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved
Section 156Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234CSection 244A

…t. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Ld.CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization v. CIT [361 ITR 646] and Mumbai ITA NOs. 4892 & 4893/MUM/2019 M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Tribunal decision in the case of Union Bank of India v. ACIT in ITA.No. 7589/Mum/2014, directed the Assessing Officer to compute interest u/s.244A as per the findings given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court observing as under: - “6.1.5. The Appellant placed reliance o…

Acifft, Circle-2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5231/MUM/2019[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2021AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved
Section 156Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234CSection 244A

…t. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Ld.CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization v. CIT [361 ITR 646] and Mumbai ITA NOs. 4892 & 4893/MUM/2019 M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Tribunal decision in the case of Union Bank of India v. ACIT in ITA.No. 7589/Mum/2014, directed the Assessing Officer to compute interest u/s.244A as per the findings given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court observing as under: - “6.1.5. The Appellant placed reliance o…

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Range-2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4893/MUM/2019[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved
Section 156Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234CSection 244A

…t. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Ld.CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization v. CIT [361 ITR 646] and Mumbai ITA NOs. 4892 & 4893/MUM/2019 M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Tribunal decision in the case of Union Bank of India v. ACIT in ITA.No. 7589/Mum/2014, directed the Assessing Officer to compute interest u/s.244A as per the findings given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court observing as under: - “6.1.5. The Appellant placed reliance o…

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. CIT Range-2(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4892/MUM/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jun 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri M. Balaganesh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved
Section 156Section 220(2)Section 234Section 234CSection 244A

…t. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. Ld.CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization v. CIT [361 ITR 646] and Mumbai ITA NOs. 4892 & 4893/MUM/2019 M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Tribunal decision in the case of Union Bank of India v. ACIT in ITA.No. 7589/Mum/2014, directed the Assessing Officer to compute interest u/s.244A as per the findings given by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court observing as under: - “6.1.5. The Appellant placed reliance o…

DCIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6273/MUM/2016[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2020AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Justice P P Bhatt & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am Dy.Commissioner Of Income Vs. State Bank Of India Tax Financial Reporting & Circle-2(2)(1) Taxation Department 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Mumbai State Bank Bhavan Madam Cama Road Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No. Aaacs8577K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 41(4)

…1995-96 wherein reliance had been placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. HEG Limited reported in 324 ITR 331 and decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation vs. CIT reported in 361 ITR 646. We find that the ld. DR fairly agreed that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in the case of State Bank of Indore in ITA No.2972/Mum/2011. We also find that this Tribunal had also held in the case of Bank of Baroda in ITA 10 State Bank of India No.1646/Mum/2017 dated 20/12/2018 (authored b…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Syndicate Bank

In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the

ITA/582/2013HC Karnataka07 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 154Section 243(1)Section 244(1)Section 246ASection 260Section 260A

…1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.582 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MANGALORE-575001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, UDUPI-576101. ... APPELLANTS (BY Mr. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND: M/S. SYNDICATE BANK H.O. MANIPAL-576104. ... RESPONDENT (BY Mr. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.,) - - - THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 12.07.2013 PASSED…

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

ITA 1434/DEL/2017[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 1991-92

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 1434/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 1991-92 Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Vs Dcit, Deputy General Manager (F&A)-Ctd, Circle-1, Corporate Tax Division, Room No. Dehradun-248001 244, Old Secretariat Building, Tel Bhawan, Dehradun-248003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco1598A Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Revenue By : Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 23.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.09.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 140ASection 154Section 244ASection 244A(1)(b)

…30.06.2.014 i.e. on the date this refund was actually granted to the appellant. The Judgments of the Hon Supreme Court in the cases of Sandvik Asia: 280 ITR 643 (SC), and H.E.G Ltd: 324 ITR 331 and the judgment of the Hon Delhi High Court in the case of ITPO: 361 ITR 646 have been cited in support of the claim. However, it is observed that a larger bench of the Hon Supreme Court considered the issue at a later date (18.09.2013) in the matter of CIT vs Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals (2013) 358 ITR 291 (SC) and held, “6. In our considered view, the aforesaid judgment has been misquoted and misinterpreted by the assessees…

Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 1(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 1995-96

ITA 236/MUM/2016[1995-96]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2019AY 1995-96

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 1995-96 M/S Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd., The Dcit, (Since Merged With Hindalco Central Ciricle – 1(4), Industries Ltd.), 902, Old Cgo Bldg., Century Bhavan, Dr. Annie Vs. Mumbai Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400025 Pan: Aaaci5375F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mahavir Jain (Dr) Revenue By : Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 12/09/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/10/2019

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Jain (DR)For Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar Jaiswal (DR)
Section 154Section 244A

…CIT(A) is contrary to the decision of the Tribunal, the same is liable to be set aside. The Ld. counsel invited our attention to the findings of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Assessment Year: 1995-96 Trade Promotion Organisation vs. CIT, 361 ITR 646 which has been followed by the Tribunal. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. departmental representative (DR) admitted that the ITAT has directed the AO to adjust the refund in accordance with the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court referred above, however, supported the concurrent findings of the authorities below. 6. We have carefully gon…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2234/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that, refund shall first be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax pay able, based on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (361 ITR 646) when the Income Tax Department had not accepted the decision and a review petition had been filed before the Hon'ble High Court." 44. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, as the issue of allowability of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits have been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in asse…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2233/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that, refund shall first be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax pay able, based on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (361 ITR 646) when the Income Tax Department had not accepted the decision and a review petition had been filed before the Hon'ble High Court." 44. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, as the issue of allowability of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits have been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in asse…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2232/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that, refund shall first be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax pay able, based on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (361 ITR 646) when the Income Tax Department had not accepted the decision and a review petition had been filed before the Hon'ble High Court." 44. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, as the issue of allowability of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits have been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in asse…

DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2231/MUM/2018[1991-92]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 1991-92

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that, refund shall first be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax pay able, based on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (361 ITR 646) when the Income Tax Department had not accepted the decision and a review petition had been filed before the Hon'ble High Court." 44. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, as the issue of allowability of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits have been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in asse…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1803/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that, refund shall first be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax pay able, based on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (361 ITR 646) when the Income Tax Department had not accepted the decision and a review petition had been filed before the Hon'ble High Court." 44. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, as the issue of allowability of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits have been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in asse…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1802/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that, refund shall first be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax pay able, based on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (361 ITR 646) when the Income Tax Department had not accepted the decision and a review petition had been filed before the Hon'ble High Court." 44. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, as the issue of allowability of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits have been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in asse…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Ltu) 2, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1801/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri C. NareshFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Poddar
Section 244A

…Id. CIT(A) erred in holding that, refund shall first be adjusted against interest payable and balance, if any, shall be adjusted towards tax pay able, based on the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in the case of India Trade Promotion Organization vs. CIT (361 ITR 646) when the Income Tax Department had not accepted the decision and a review petition had been filed before the Hon'ble High Court." 44. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, as the issue of allowability of deduction u/s. 36(1)(viia) of the Act on merits have been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer in asse…

DCIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. State Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 5910/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am Acit-2(2)(1) Vs. M/S. State Bank Of India Room No.545, 5Th Floor Frt Department, 3Rd Floor Aayakar Bhavan Corporate Centre, State M.K.Road Bank Bhawan, Madam Cama Churchgate, Road, Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan/Gir No.Aaacs8577K (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 140ASection 143(3)Section 244A

…Appeal No. CIT(A)-4/IT-153/DC 2(1)/2013-14 had directed the ld AO to pass a speaking order and grant correct interest u/s 244A of the Act in the light of decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of India Trade Promotion Organisation vs CIT reported in 361 ITR 646 (Del). The ld AO following the direction of ld CITA considered the grant of interest u/s 244A of the Act in the giving effect to the ld CIT(A)’s order on 27.3.2015. In the said order , the ld AO took the figure of refund originally determined at Rs 200,87,14,868/- and calculated the interest for the period 1.4.95 to 4.7.97 u/s 244A of the Act at…