TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (4) TMI 797
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o decide them by a common order. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee-company is engaged in the business of hire purchase finance, leasing and bill discounting. For the assessment year 1999-2000, it filed return of income on November 30, 2000 declaring gross total income of Rs. 37.03 crores. It was subsequently revised and brought down to Rs. 34.95 crores by way of return filed under section 139(4) of the Act. In the regular assessment, various additions were made, against which the assessee preferred appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). While completing assessment to give effect the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s order, interest under section 234D was levied in all these....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ficer was right in rejecting the appellant's petition under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for rectification of the mistake apparent on the record. 3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in concluding that the subject-matter of rectification sought by the appellant was a debatable one and hence beyond the purview of section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3.1 The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have applied the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in Sree Karpagambal Mills Ltd. v. CIT [1999] 238 ITR 842 (Mad.), Seshasayee Paper and Boards Ltd. v. CIT [2003] 260 ITR 419 (Mad.) and Om Sindhoori Capital Investments Ltd. v. Joint CIT [2005] 274 ITR 427 (Mad.) which support the appellant's content....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rovision made in the statute for levy of interest must be construed as substantive law. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have also noted the decisions of the Supreme Court in Govinddas v. ITO [1976] 103 ITR 123 (SC), S. L. Srinivasa Jute Twine Mills P. Ltd. v. Union of India [2006] 2 Supreme 162 (para 21), Karimtharuvi Tea Estate Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1966] 60 ITR 262 (SC), Asst. Commissioner v. Velliappa Textiles Ltd. [2003] 263 ITR 550 (SC), Keshavan Madhava Menon v. State of Bombay, AIR 1951 SC 128, Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. v. ITC, AIR 1927 PC 242 and CIT v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd. [1961] 42 ITR 589 (SC). 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the decision of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and that of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Delhi, Special Bench in the case of ITO v. Ekta Promoters (P.) Ltd. [2008] 113 ITD 719 referred to as above in the grounds of appeal, amongst others, were ruling the field by holding that interest under section 234D was leviable in cases pertaining to the assessment year up to 2003-04. The learned authorised representative after repeating the arguments taken in the above grounds, has further submitted that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench has distinguished the hon'ble Madras High Court's decision but sitting in Chennai, the hon'ble jurisdictional High Court's decision has to be followed. On the other hand, the learned Departmental representative has strongly opposed the above c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Bros. [1971] 82 ITR 50 is relevant. All the decisions referred to by the Department are in relation to charging of interest under section 234D. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, Special Bench in the case of Ekta Promoters (P.) Ltd. (supra) it has been clearly held that there is no ambiguity in the language of section 234D because the Legislature has specifically mentioned the date of its application as June 1, 2003. It has been clearly and categorically held that this provision is not retrospective in effect. In the background of these facts, the question to be decided gets tilted towards the applicability of the provision of section 234D in these years before us. When there was no such provision in the sta....