2015 (2) TMI 734

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r consideration: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on a proper interpretation of s. 234A and s.234B of the Act, the ITAT was justified in holding that the assessee was liable to pay interest under those sections; when admittedly the assessee had a bona fide belief and a strong arguable case that its income for the relevant A. Y. would be 'nil' and hence, no default in payment of advance tax had occurred?". 3. The Appellant is engaged in business as builder and developer following the project completion method for purposes of paying its taxes. During the course of assessment proceedings for Assessment Year 2003-04, it was noticed that a miscellaneous income of Rs. 1.32 Crores offered to tax in A. Y.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Steel Ltd. (supra) is inapplicable. 6. Thereafter while giving effect to the order of the Tribunal in quantum proceeding, the Assessing Officer charged interest under Section 234A and 234B of the Act, inter alia in respect of default in payment of advance tax for the Assessment Year 2000-01. On appeal, the CIT(A) by order dated 22nd July, 2011 upheld charging of interest under Section 234A and 234B of the Act as charged by the Assessing Officer. On further appeal by the Assessee, the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 5th October, 2012 placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v/s. Anjum M. H. Ghaswala 252 ITR 1 wherein it is held that levy of interest under Sections 234A and 234B are mandatory and compensatory in ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ear 2000-01. On facts in quantum proceedings, it has been held by the Tribunal that the amount received on parking charges has nothing to do with the appellant's project and was assessable to tax in Assessment Year 2000-01. This has been accepted by the Appellant. If this be so, the Appellant was obliged to pay Advance tax and nonpayment of the same would carry with it the further burden on interest under Section 234B of the Act. This is so in view of Anjum Ghaswala (supra) where it is held that payment of interest is mandatory and compensatory. 10. The reliance by the Appellant on the decision of this Court in Prime Securities (supra) is misplaced as it was not the case of the Revenue that the the assessee therein had committed any ....