https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193219 The ITAT Chandigarh dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the interpretation of section 132B(1) and the retrospective application of the amendment introduced by the Finance Act 2013. The ITAT concurred with the CIT(A) that the seized cash could not be considered as advance tax payment and that the amendment did not have retrospective effect. The ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to rework the interest leviable under sections 234B/C based on this decision and the legislative intent behind the amendment. en-us Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Jul 2017 10:16:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193219 The ITAT Chandigarh dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the interpretation of section 132B(1) and the retrospective application of the amendment introduced by the Finance Act 2013. The ITAT concurred with the CIT(A) that the seized cash could not be considered as advance tax payment and that the amendment did not have retrospective effect. The ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to rework the interest leviable under sections 234B/C based on this decision and the legislative intent behind the amendment. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193219