TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (6) TMI 563
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ame and style of M/s Vista Levlor for the manufacturing, sale and export of its products. The new unit was established in financial year 1989-90 and started manufacturing and sale etc., immediately after the proper set up of new industrial undertaking. Though the unit was entitled for deduction u/s 80-I of the Income Tax Act 1961 ("hereinafter the Act") besides deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act for export of its products, the appellant under misconception of law did not claim the deduction u/s 80-I and so was not allowed deduction in that financial year. However, it had claimed deduction u/s 80HHC in that F.Y. and that was allowed to it. The AO completed the assessment on the basis of return filed by the assessee, where, no deduction u/s 80-I ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ver, we find that the ld. CIT has passed an order u/s 263 of the Act, wherein, he has found that the order passed by the AO u/s 154, was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue and vide order dated 31.01.2005 cancelled the order of AO granting interest on refund to the appellant. 4. Aggrieved by the said order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal against the order of CIT u/s 263 before the ITAT and another appeal challenging the withdrawal of interest passed u/s 154 of the Act by the AO before the CIT (A). On the said appeal, the ld. CIT (A) held that since the CIT has passed order u/s 263, the appeal preferred before it has become infractuous and did not pass any order on merit and dismissed the appeal. 5. Aggrieved b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ranted if AO finds that the delay in part or full, for which the interest on refund is being granted, was attributable to the assessee. Further, any dispute regarding such interest, has to be adjudicated by CIT or CCIT (and not CIT (A). 7.3.1 In the present case, vide first application u/s 154 moved by assessee was rejected by the AO. No appeal was moved by the assessee against such rejection. So also, the said rejection had already become final. 7.3.2 More importantly; once assessee's claim for interest u/s 244A had been rejected; subsequent application u/s 154 dated 24.02.2003 tantamounted todispute, which could not be adjudicated by the AO. The AO could have granted interest u/s 244A, only after referring the dispute to CIT/CCIT. But t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessment year, such interest shall be calculated at the rate of [one-half per cent] for every month or part of a month comprised in the period from the 1st day of April of the assessment year to the date on which the refund is granted: Provided that no interest shall be payable if the amount of refund is less than ten per cent of the tax as determined [under sub-section (1) of section 115WE or] sub-section (1) of section 143 or] on regular assessment; (b) in any other case, such interest shall be calculated at the rate of [one-half per cent] for every month or part of a month comprised in the period or periods from the date or, as the case may be, dates of payment of the tax or penalty to the date on which the refund is granted." Explanat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cts of the instant case with the aforesaid provision, we find that the entertainment of application/appeal for interest on refund by the AO at the first instance u/s 154 of the Act itself was without jurisdiction. Therefore, all subsequent proceeding emanating from it will be a nullity in the eyes of law. The assessee as per the afore stated provision, ought to have moved an application before either the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax or Commissioner of Income Tax having jurisdiction to entertain its application for interest on refund u/s 244A of the Act, rather than moving an application u/s 154 before the AO at the first place. It may be remembered that there is no inherent right of appeal; Appeal is a creature of statute and when the s....