Appeals dismissed on interest relief denial in Income Tax Act.

The appeals filed by the assessee challenging the denial of relief under Sections 234A and 234B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were dismissed. The Tribunal found no evidence linking the delay in filing returns to the absence of seized materials or revenue's delay in providing them. The Tribunal suggested seeking waiver of interest from Revenue Authorities if desired. The judgment emphasized the need for evidence linking the delay to seized materials for seeking waiver of interest. Failure to provide such evidence resulted in the dismissal of the appeals as no substantial question of law arose for consideration.

---

---

Issues:
- Challenge to order rejecting relief under Section 234A and B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 based on delay in filing returns due to seized materials availability.
- Interpretation of Section 234A and 234B regarding interest for defaults in furnishing return of income and payment of advance tax.
- Comparison with previous judgment in T P Indrakumar case regarding waiver of interest.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to appeals filed by the assessee against a Tribunal order denying relief under Section 234A and B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the delayed filing of returns was due to the delayed availability of seized materials, and thus interest should not be charged for the delay. However, the Tribunal, relying on the M S Ghaswala case, found no evidence linking the delay to the absence of seized materials or revenue's delay in providing them. The Tribunal suggested approaching Authorities for waiver of interest if desired. The assessee, aggrieved by this decision, filed the appeals.

The counsel for the assessee argued that the Tribunal should have considered the reasons for the delay, citing the T P Indrakumar case where interest under Section 234A and B was not charged. Section 234A deals with interest for defaults in furnishing return of income, while Section 234B pertains to interest for defaults in advance tax payment. The principle behind levying interest is to compensate the Revenue for the loss incurred due to delayed tax payment or return filing, benefiting the assessee. The T P Indrakumar case highlighted the possibility of waiver to avoid adverse consequences, but in the present case, the delay was attributed to seized materials not being returned promptly, affecting the return filing under Section 153A.

The judgment emphasized that if the seized materials were available for filing the return under Section 153A, the assessee could seek waiver of interest from Revenue Authorities. Failure to provide evidence linking the delay to the absence of seized materials or revenue's delay led to the dismissal of the appeals. The judgment concluded that no substantial question of law arose for consideration on merits, admission, or consideration, resulting in the dismissal of the appeals.

---