← All Phrases

“interest on refund”

InterestSection 244ASection 244A278 judgments

The decision most relied on for interest on refund is Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. CIT (280 ITR 643), cited in 96 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on interest on refund

Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. CIT
280 ITR 643 · 2006 · Supreme Court
96
citing judgments

Assessees are entitled to compensation for the inordinate delay by the Income Tax Department in refunding excess tax, which includes interest on the statutory interest due under section 244A for such delayed refunds.

Union of India v. Tata Chemicals Ltd.
363 ITR 658 · 2014 · Supreme Court
91
citing judgments

The Department has a moral and legal obligation to refund excess tax collected from taxpayers, along with interest. An assessee is entitled to interest on the amount of taxes refunded, including interest on interest, as per Section 244A of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Pfizer Ltd.
330 ITR 62 · 2011 · High Court
78
citing judgments

An insurance claim received on stock in trade constitutes business income and is not an independent source of income.

CIT v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.
125 Taxmann 1094 · 2002 · High Court
77
citing judgments

Interest levied under Section 201(1A) for delayed remittance of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) is compensatory in nature, not penal. It is a distinct provision for delayed remittance, similar to interest paid by Revenue on refunds.

CIT v. Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals
358 ITR 291 · 2013 · Supreme Court
72
citing judgments

An assessee is not entitled to interest on interest under section 244A of the Income-tax Act, particularly regarding interest granted on a refund.

Union Bank of India v. ACIT
72 Taxmann.com 348 · 2016 · ITAT
69
citing judgments

A tax refund must first be adjusted towards interest payable under Section 244A, with the balance then appropriated against the principal tax amount. This approach does not lead to interest on interest.

CIT v. HEG Ltd.
324 ITR 331 · 2010 · Supreme Court
63
citing judgments

Under Section 244A, the "amount due" for a refund includes both the principal tax and the interest accrued thereon up to the date the refund is granted. If the revenue fails to pay the full amount of refund, it is liable to pay further interest on the outstanding balance of this total refund, which does not constitute "interest on interest".

India Trade Promotion Organisation v. CIT
361 ITR 646 · 2014 · High Court
54
citing judgments

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.

Judgments citing interest on refund

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1102/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

aforesaid decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India supra. The Id AO is hereby directed to compute the interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act as per the plea of the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and that

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1101/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

aforesaid decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India supra. The Id AO is hereby directed to compute the interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act as per the plea of the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and that

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1100/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

aforesaid decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India supra. The Id AO is hereby directed to compute the interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act as per the plea of the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and that

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1099/MUM/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

aforesaid decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India supra. The Id AO is hereby directed to compute the interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act as per the plea of the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and that

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1098/MUM/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

aforesaid decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India supra. The Id AO is hereby directed to compute the interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act as per the plea of the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and that

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1097/MUM/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Paresh Deshpande
Section 140ASection 244A

aforesaid decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India supra. The Id AO is hereby directed to compute the interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act as per the plea of the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and that

Hotel Skyline Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bharuch

ITA 332/SRT/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.331 & 332/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2017-18 & 2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Hotel Skyline Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Skyline Building, Old N.H. No.8, Ward-1(1), Bharuch Vs. Near Hotel Maharaja, Bharuch- Income Tax Office, Station Road, 392001 Hari Kunj Building, Above Bank Of Baroda, Bharuch-356069 "थायीलेखासं /.जीआइआरसं /.Pan/Gir No.: Aaach 5317 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Rasesh Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/06/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 16.09.2022, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (‘Ao’ For Short) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 143(3A R/W.S 143(3B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Vide Order Dated 06.12.2019 & 16.03.2021 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 57

expense is allowable u/s 57(iii) of the Act. 11. We also note that assessee has not claimed the interest expenses against the interest on refund received from the income tax department. Interest on refund has been shown in the computation of total income only for disclosure purposes

Hotel Skyline Pvt. Ltd., Bharuch vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Bharuch

ITA 331/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं/.Ita Nos.331 & 332/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2017-18 & 2018-19) (Physical Court Hearing) Hotel Skyline Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer, Skyline Building, Old N.H. No.8, Ward-1(1), Bharuch Vs. Near Hotel Maharaja, Bharuch- Income Tax Office, Station Road, 392001 Hari Kunj Building, Above Bank Of Baroda, Bharuch-356069 "थायीलेखासं /.जीआइआरसं /.Pan/Gir No.: Aaach 5317 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Rasesh Shah, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 07/06/2023 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee, Pertaining To Assessment Years 2017-18 & 2018-19, Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [In Short “Nfac/Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 16.09.2022, Which In Turn Arise Out Of Separate Assessment Orders Passed By The Assessing Officer (‘Ao’ For Short) Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 143(3A R/W.S 143(3B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Vide Order Dated 06.12.2019 & 16.03.2021 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Rasesh Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 57

expense is allowable u/s 57(iii) of the Act. 11. We also note that assessee has not claimed the interest expenses against the interest on refund received from the income tax department. Interest on refund has been shown in the computation of total income only for disclosure purposes

DCIT Cir. 6 (3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4337/MUM/2005[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80HSection 80I

emanating from the record, are: The assessee, during the appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A), submitted that since the receipt of interest on refund has not reached the stage of finality as the Department has not accepted the decision of the learned CIT(A) and has preferred further appeal ... before the Tribunal, at this stage, the interest on refund should not be taxed. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, dismissed the ground raised by the assessee and held that there is nothing in the Act to wait for such taxation till the matter reaches the stage of finality

M/S. Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT CIT Cir. 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3439/MUM/2005[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2023AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistri a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80HSection 80I

emanating from the record, are: The assessee, during the appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A), submitted that since the receipt of interest on refund has not reached the stage of finality as the Department has not accepted the decision of the learned CIT(A) and has preferred further appeal ... before the Tribunal, at this stage, the interest on refund should not be taxed. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, dismissed the ground raised by the assessee and held that there is nothing in the Act to wait for such taxation till the matter reaches the stage of finality

Interglobe Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram vs. DCIT, Circle-10(2), New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7060/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Department by: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 244A

244A of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) on going through the grounds of Appeal of the assessee which pertaining to computation of interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act and taking into consideration of the fact that the assessee had challenged the assessment order passed ... paid at the same amount in May 2017. In other words, the grievance of the assessee was that the assessee has not received interest on refund from the November 2017 to May 2017. Thus, it is clear that the assessee is not aggrieved by the assessment order dated 23/12/2014 passed

Addl. CIT, Special Range-3, New Delhi vs. Fortis Healthcare Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7338/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri R. M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT(DR)
Section 14A

first appellate order we note that during proceedings the appellant submitted that the Assessing Officer is not correct in making addition since the interest on refund has been duly accounted for partly in preceding year ending on 31.03.2011 and partly amounting to Rs.12,47,000/- in present ... also given liberty and direction to the Assessing Officer to verify that as to whether the assessee has offered the interest on refund for taxation for AY 2011-12 and 2012-13. In such a situation no prejudice has been caused to the revenue and there was no leakage

DCIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai vs. M/S. Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5978/MUM/2004[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80H

pertaining to the issue, as emanating from the record, are: The assessee, before the learned CIT(A), submitted that since the receipt of interest on refund has not reached the stage of finality as the Department has not accepted the decision of the learned CIT(A) and has preferred further ... appeal before the Tribunal, at this stage, the interest on refund should not be taxed. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, dismissed the ground raised by the assessee and held that there is nothing in the Act to wait for such taxation till the matter reaches the stage

Grasim Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Range 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4754/MUM/2004[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jun 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri J.D. Mistry a/wFor Respondent: Dr. Kishore Dhule
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43BSection 80Section 80H

pertaining to the issue, as emanating from the record, are: The assessee, before the learned CIT(A), submitted that since the receipt of interest on refund has not reached the stage of finality as the Department has not accepted the decision of the learned CIT(A) and has preferred further ... appeal before the Tribunal, at this stage, the interest on refund should not be taxed. The learned CIT(A), vide impugned order, dismissed the ground raised by the assessee and held that there is nothing in the Act to wait for such taxation till the matter reaches the stage

Ntpc Electric Supply Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. PCIT-08, New Delhi

ITA 4708/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh.Anubhav Sharma

Section 143(3)Section 263

case, the learned CIT has erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the contention of the appellant that the alleged interest on refund as well as refund for the A.Y. 2011-12 was never received by the assessee company and hence cannot be taxed as income ... case, the learned CIT has erred both on facts and in law in ignoring the contention of the appellant that the alleged interest on refund for the A.Y. 2011-12 was adjusted with the demand of A.Y. 2009-10 which was not even pending at the time when the adjustment

Micro Focus Software Inc. (Earlier Known As Novell Inc.), Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT (Intl. Taxation)-Circle-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2425/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 144C(5)

assessed income of INR 5,78,93,810 at the rate 40% along with surcharge and education cess. Without appreciating the fact that interest on refund of INR 54,471 (as per return of income) is offered to tax at the flat rate of 15% as per beneficial provision

Micro Focus Software Inc. (Earlier Known As Novell Inc.), Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT (Intl. Taxation)-Circle-3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2424/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 144C(5)

assessed income of INR 5,78,93,810 at the rate 40% along with surcharge and education cess. Without appreciating the fact that interest on refund of INR 54,471 (as per return of income) is offered to tax at the flat rate of 15% as per beneficial provision

Girnar Software Private Limited, 6Th Floor, Jaipur Textile Market, B-2 Near Model Town, Malviya Nagar Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle 4, Jaipur

ITA 428/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Parwal, CA and Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 244A

under :- “ Interest on income tax refund is allowable under section 244A of the Act which is reproduced below (as per Finance Act 2015): “Interest on refunds. 244A. (1) Where refund of any amount becomes due to the assessee under this Act, he shall, subject to the provisions of this section ... evident from above, as per section 244A(1)(a) of the Act, where refund is arising, inter-alia, out of TDS, interest on refund has to be calculated at the rate of 0.5 percent for every month or part of a month comprised in the period M/s. Girnar Software

Umano Healthcare Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-27(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 3256/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Pratap Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 37(1)

para 4.1, 5.1, 6.1, 7.1 and 8.1 of his appellate order. The Ld. CIT(A) allowed relief of Rs. 3200/- being interest on refund which he found to have 3 been disclosed by the assessee under the head ‘discount received’. Rest of the additions have been confirmed

ACIT, Central Circle- 27, New Delhi vs. Uflex Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, this appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5776/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: The Date Of Expiry Of The Time Allowed Under Sub-Section (5) Of The Section 153 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. The Ld. Cit (A) Has Erred In Facts & Law Ignoring The Fact That The Provisions Of Section 244A(1)(Aa) & 244A(1A) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Came Into Existence From 01.06.2016 & There Is No Provision For Allowing The Same With Retrospective Effect.

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pramod Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 153Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(aa)Section 250

under :- “1. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in facts and law by allowing the appeal of the assessee to allow the interest on refund as per the provisions of section 244A(1) and 244(1A) of the Act for AY 2014-15. 2 ITA No.5776/Del./2019 ... There is only one issue involved in all the grounds of appeal which relates to contention of the appellant for not allowing the interest on refund as per provisions of section 244A (1)(aa) and 244A(1A) of the IT Act. I have considered the facts and circumstance