2013 (12) TMI 312

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Commissioner of Income-tax ? (b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is correct in deciding the appeal on question involving exclusion of the period of delay attributable to the assessee from the period from which interest is payable when this issue was decided by the Commissioner of Income-tax and his decision on the issue is final as provided in sub-section (2) of section 244A of the Act? (c) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is correct in holding that the interest is due to the assessee even for the period prior to December 31, 2004, when no claim of refund was made by the assessee ? (d) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Consequent to the above, the Assessing Officer by an order dated June 28, 2006, gave effect to the order dated March 29, 2006, of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and determined the respondent's income for the assessment year 2002-03 at a negative figure (loss) of Rs.60.59 crores. Further, by the aforesaid order, the Assessing Officer also holds that the respondent is entitled to refund of Rs. 32.06 crores paid as tax and interests thereon under section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the said Act), amounting to Rs. 5.33 crores for the period from April 1, 2002, to June 28, 2006. The Commissioner of Income-tax in his administrative capacity by a communication dated August 21, 2006, directed the Assessing Officer not to allow int....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 154 of the said Act was warranted as the question of delay was not a debatable issue, in view of the communication of the Commissioner of Income-tax dated August 21, 2006. The Tribunal in the impugned order held that whether or not, there was a delay in the proceedings and to whom is such delay is attributable is a question of fact, requiring investigation. This investigation of the cause for the delay would itself make it a debatable issue as both the respondent-assessee and the Revenue would have different perspective on the same. Further, the communication made by the Commissioner of Income-tax dated August 21, 2006, was a communication based on his perspective of the reasons for the delay and the respondent's perspective had not eve....