Tribunal sets aside interest charges under Sections 234B and 234C, directs recalculating. Appellant's other grounds rejected.

The appeal was partly allowed with the Tribunal setting aside the CIT(A)'s order on charging interest under Sections 234B and 234C. The Tribunal directed a recomputation of interest in accordance with precedent, ruling that interest under Section 234C could not be levied and interest under Section 234B should be calculated only until the date of the appellant's request for adjustment of seized cash. Other grounds raised by the appellant were rejected for not being pressed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Dismissal of appeal ex parte by CIT(A).
2. Non-deposit of "admitted tax" as per Section 249(4).
3. Charging of interest under Section 234B and 234C.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Dismissal of Appeal Ex Parte by CIT(A):
The appellant contended that the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law by dismissing the appeal ex parte without providing adequate opportunity for a hearing. The appellant was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause from attending the hearing in response to the notices issued. The Tribunal initially set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed a fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity for hearing. However, the appellant subsequently did not press these grounds, and they were rejected.

2. Non-Deposit of "Admitted Tax" as per Section 249(4):
The appellant argued that the CIT(A) wrongly dismissed the appeal in limine, holding that the "admitted tax" had not been deposited, making the appeal non-maintainable. The appellant claimed that the entire "admitted tax" had been deposited, and the CIT(A) misinterpreted the provisions. The appellant highlighted that the case was related to an order under Section 154 and not Section 143(3), thus Section 249(4) was not applicable. The appellant also pointed out that the Assessing Officer had dropped penalty proceedings under Sections 140A/221, indicating that the "admitted tax" was deemed deposited. These grounds were also not pressed by the appellant and were rejected.

3. Charging of Interest under Section 234B and 234C:
The primary issue left for adjudication was the charging of interest under Sections 234B and 234C. The facts involved a search and seizure operation, resulting in the seizure of cash and postdated cheques towards the tax liability. The appellant contended that the seized amount should have been adjusted against the tax liability, and interest under Sections 234B and 234C should not have been charged.

The Tribunal noted that a similar issue had been addressed in the case of the 'Radha Mohan Purshottam Das Agarwal' Group, where it was held that interest under Section 234C could not be levied if the income was surrendered on the last day of the financial year, as the liability to pay advance tax arose only at that moment. For Section 234B, the Tribunal held that the interest should be computed only till the date the appellant requested the adjustment of the seized cash towards the tax liability.

The Tribunal found that the facts of the present case were identical to those in the 'Radha Mohan Purshottam Das Agarwal' Group and followed the same reasoning. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the interest under Section 234B only till the date of the appellant's request for adjustment of the seized cash and held that interest under Section 234C could not be levied.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) regarding the charging of interest under Sections 234B and 234C, directing a recomputation in line with the established precedent. The other grounds were rejected as not pressed.

---