Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. CIT

281 ITR 274High Court2006#15592 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 125Section 154Section 234CSection 244ASection 250

Issues it is cited on

interest

Judgments citing Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. CIT

SPORTA TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(1)(1) , MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 3500/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Am M/S. Sporta Technologies Private Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax (Appeals) – 1 Jaipur, Unit 1201, 1202, A-Wing, Dcit 3(1)(1), Vs. 12Th Floor One Bkc, Plot No.66, Aayakar Bhawan, G Block Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aagca4854K (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 234CSection 250

…overnment which was subsequent to the presentment of the cheque for payment. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court had in this decision distinguished the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajasthan Sate Electricity Board Vs. CIT (2006) 281 ITR 274 and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Sutlej Industries Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 331/190 Taxman 136 which was relied upon by the Revenue. Further, we also draw support from the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT Vs. REPCO Home Finance Ltd. (2015) 53 taxmann.com 47 (Madras) where on ide…

T vs. UPASANA LIMITED,CHENNAIVS.ITO, CORPORATE WARD-6(1), CHENNAI

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2475/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri George George K., Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2475/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2020-21) M/S.Tvs Upasana Limited Ito 98-A, 7Th Floor, Auras Corporate Centre, बनाम/ Corporate Ward-6(1) Dr.Radha Krishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Tan No. Aaaca-5460-F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : S/Shri K. Srinivasan & P. Viswanathan (Cas) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure (Jcit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08-01-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-01-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: S/Shri K. Srinivasan & P. ViswanathanFor Respondent: Ms. Sandhya Rani Kure (JCIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 244A

…d that refund is granted the moment the concerned officer has signed the order regarding the payment of interest u/s 244A of the act. Reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity Board vs. CIT (281 ITR 274) to arrive at such a conclusion. Accordingly, the additional interest was denied to the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. Upon careful consideration of factual matrix, it could be seen that the additional interest has been denied to the assessee on account of the fact that an intimation appear to have been issue…

INTERMARK SHIPPING AGENCIES PVT. LTD.,GANDHIDHAM vs. JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 280/RJT/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot10 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 246A

…due interest under Section 244A of the Act till the date of payment of refund to the assessee. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity Board vs. CIT Tax Appeal No.205 of 2004, 281 ITR 274 held that refund of tax is granted at the moment the concerned Officer signs the order regarding payment of interest sunder Section 244A of the Act and interest should be granted till that date only. The interest component should have been calculated till the receipt of the refund as per the contentions of the Ld. AR. 6. The Ld. DR submitted tha…

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. ASCENDAS SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2964/CHNY/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jun 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Varuvooru Sreedhar, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Shri GSD Babu, Advocate
Section 154Section 244A

…e interest u/s.244A of the Act up to the date of refund cheque i.e., 11.11.2014. The assessee moved rectification application before AO which was rejected by AO by citing the decision of Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity vs. CIT, 281 ITR 274. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) stated that the decision of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity supra is in favour of assessee and also cited the Board’s instruction No.7 dated 01.08.2002 and directed the AO to grant interest u/s.244A of the Act on the refund amount up to the…

INDOGULF CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT RG 3, MUMBAI

In the result, Ground No.1 to 3 are allowed

ITA 765/MUM/2015[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2019AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar (AR)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 244ASection 254(1)

…ssee. 5. The Assessing Officer, repudiated both the claims of the assessee for first claim i.e. the upto date interest till the date of refund voucher was denied by taking view that the Rajasthan High Court in Rajasthan State Electricity Board vs. CIT (2006) 281 ITR 274 (Raj.) held that the refund is granted, the moment the officer signed the payment interest u/s 244A. The second contention of assessee for claiming interest on interest was declined on the ground that the decision of Sandvik Asia Ltd. (280 ITR 643), relied by assessee is based on a peculiar facts of said case and cannot be applied on the facts…

STANDARD CHARTERED BANK,MUMBAI vs. DDIT (IT) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 834/MUM/2012[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 834/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) Standard Chartered Bank Ddit (It)-2(1), बनाम/ 1St Floor, Scindia House, Taxation Department, 23-25, M. G. Road, 3Rd Floor, N. M. Marg, Ballard Pier, Vs. Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 038 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcs 4681 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ankit Mehta ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Vachaspati Tripathi

For Appellant: Shri Ankit MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Vachaspati Tripathi
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 2Section 220(2)Section 234DSection 243DSection 245

…dered view, therefore, ‘grant’ of refund has to be considered in a holistic and not a pedantic manner. It may not imply the date of receipt of the refund order, and its’ signing may signify its grant, as held in Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. CIT [2006] 281 ITR 274 (Raj.), but surely it must be followed by it’s issue. If it is not ‘issued’, a term legally well explained, as in R.K. Upadhyaya v. Shanabhai P. Patel [1987] 166 ITR 163 (SC), can the refund be said to have been granted? The amount cannot remain in vacuum, so that either the refund has not been or has been granted, even if by way of adjustment, t…

Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. CIT (281 ITR 274) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax