2014 (4) TMI 973

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case, the Tribunal, in law, was right in holding that the assessee being a notified person under the Special Court (Trial of Offences relating to Transactions in Securities) Act,1992 is not liable to pay interest u/s.234 A, 234 B and 234 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring the legal sanctity of Law that the interest chargeable under these sections is not only consequential but is mandatory in nature? 6.2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that interest under section 234 A, 234 B and 234 C is not chargeable in the assessee's case being notified person under Special Court (Trial of offences relating to Transactions in Securities) Act,1992 without appreciating t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the respondent was prevented from discharging the liability, if any, to pay the advance tax. Thus, this is a case where an act of the Court has caused prejudice to the respondent. These aspects were not noticed leave alone considered and dealt with in the judgment of "Divine Holdings Pvt.Ltd." (supra). 3. We are unable accept any of these contentions for the simple reason that a detailed judgment has been delivered by the Division Bench of this Court in the case "Divine Holdings Pvt.Ltd."(supra). The substantial questions of law viz. Question nos.(1) and (2) which are framed in the judgment of the Division Bench are identical to the present Appeal. 4. The Division Bench on detailed analysis of the legal provisions came to a conclusi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....specific assessee which was unable to comply with the requirement of predeposit of the amount demanded and interest thereon. The Judgment in the case of "Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Emilio Ruiz Berdejo and others, ((2010) 320 ITR 190) " also will not assist the Assessee before us. That is distinguishable on facts. 6. Such orders do not enable us to brush aside the binding judgment of the Division Bench in the case "Divine Holdings Pvt.Ltd." (supra). We can ignore a binding judgment only if it is Per incuriam. In the case of "Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr." reported in "AIR 2005 SC 752" at page 755, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:- "Per incuriam means a decision rendered ....