TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court quashes orders denying interest on tax refund, emphasizes correct interpretation of law</h1> <h3>M/s. New Mangalore Port Trust Versus Commissioner of Income Tax Mangalore, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 (1), Mangalore</h3> M/s. New Mangalore Port Trust Versus Commissioner of Income Tax Mangalore, Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1 (1), Mangalore - TMI Issues:- Refusal to award interest on refund- Interpretation of Section 244A(2) of the Income Tax ActRefusal to award interest on refund:The petitioner, a Trust owned by the Government of India, filed writ petitions seeking to quash an order declining to award interest on the refund granted by the Assessing Officer. The petitioner's income was exempted under Section 10(20) of the Income Tax Act until 31.3.2003. After filing an application under Section 12A of the Act, the Commissioner of Income Tax rejected it, leading to an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting registration under Section 12A w.e.f. 1.4.2003. This decision was upheld by the High Court. Despite this, the Assessing Officer granted a refund but denied interest citing Section 244A(2) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax, in a revision order, upheld the decision. The petitioner contended that the refusal to award interest was erroneous and illegal, emphasizing that the delay was not solely attributable to them. The petitioner argued that relevant provisions of the Act were not considered properly, and the authorities failed to interpret Section 244A(2) accurately.Interpretation of Section 244A(2) of the Income Tax Act:The petitioner's counsel argued that the authorities did not consider the delay caused by the revenue and failed to involve the Prl. Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in deciding on interest payment. The petitioner highlighted Sections 244A(1), 244A(2), 244(1A), and 153 of the Act, stating that the correct interpretation of interest payment should involve higher authorities. The petitioner stressed that the orders granting exemption by the Tribunal and the High Court were not taken into account while deciding on interest payment. The Court noted that the authorities did not properly consider the material facts and relevant provisions of the Act. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petitions, quashed the orders refusing interest on the refund, and remanded the matters to the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax for re-adjudication based on the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax and the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act.This detailed analysis of the judgment addresses the issues of refusal to award interest on the refund and the interpretation of Section 244A(2) of the Income Tax Act, providing a comprehensive overview of the legal proceedings and decisions involved.
TaxTMI 