https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753960 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal regarding denial of interest on delayed DDT refund. The tribunal held that lower authorities misinterpreted section 244A(1) provisions and wrongly applied subsequent sections based on incorrect presumption about section 156 notice. Citing SC precedent in Union of India vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd., the tribunal emphasized that interest payment is a statutory, non-discretionary obligation. The tribunal ruled section 244A grants substantive rights, not merely procedural ones, and set aside the lower authority's order denying interest. The assessee was held entitled to interest on DDT refund from excess tax payment date until actual payment. en-us Mon, 27 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Jun 2024 12:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753960 The ITAT Mumbai allowed the assessee's appeal regarding denial of interest on delayed DDT refund. The tribunal held that lower authorities misinterpreted section 244A(1) provisions and wrongly applied subsequent sections based on incorrect presumption about section 156 notice. Citing SC precedent in Union of India vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd., the tribunal emphasized that interest payment is a statutory, non-discretionary obligation. The tribunal ruled section 244A grants substantive rights, not merely procedural ones, and set aside the lower authority's order denying interest. The assessee was held entitled to interest on DDT refund from excess tax payment date until actual payment. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753960