TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (10) TMI 2427
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nterest charged under Section 234A of the Act. The Assessing Officer passed an order under Section 154 of the Act dt.18.5.2012 rejecting the assessee's application. Aggrieved by this order under Section 154 of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (Appeals) - II, Bangalore who dismissed the assessee's appeal vide order dt.2.12.2013. 3.1 Aggrieved by the order of the CIT (Appeals) - II, Bangalore dt.2.12.2013 for Assessment Year 2009-10, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds :- " 1. On the facts and in the circumstances, the CIT (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal without properly appreciating the facts and the explanations of the appellant. 2. The CIT (Appeals) grossly erred in not appreciating that the appellant's plea all along was that interest charged under Section 234A and 234B of the Act was excessive and it was never the case of the appellant that the same was not chargeable and therefore finding given by the CIT (Appeals) is not sustainable in the eye of law. 3. The CIT (Appeals) ought to have appreciated on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the interest worked out by the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal before the Tribunal was the question of interest chargeable under Section 234A of the Act. The assessee contended that the order of the learned CIT (Appeals) was erroneous in not appreciating that the assessee was charged excessive interest under Section 234A of the Act. It was also contended that the judicial pronouncement by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Pranoy Roy (supra) and the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Bharatbhai B Shah V ITO reported in (2007) 31 Taxman.Com 34 were squarely applicable to the assessee's case and ought to have been considered and followed by the authorities below. It is contended by the assessee that the M.P. that these issues have not been considered by the Tribunal in impugned order. 3.5.2 We find, from a perusal of the impugned order, that the Tribunal has considered the issues raised and the judicial pronouncements relied upon and has rendered a specific finding, upholding the order of the learned CIT (Appeals). The relevant portion of the Tribunal order at paras 6.3.1 and 6.3.2 is extracted hereunder :- " 6.3.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record, inclu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 29.08.2009 20,00,000 29.09.2009 10,00,000 3.11.2009 10,00,000 50,00,000 Tax on Regular Assessment 9,60,000 It can be seen from the above that the assessee has paid 10 lakhs on 3.11.2009 much after the due date of filing return of income during the year under question. This cardinal factum distinguishes the assessee's case form that of Prannoy Roy (supra). In the case of Prannoy Roy, though the assessee filed the return of income late, he had taken care to pay the due taxes well before the due date of filing return of income thereby fulfilling the statutory stipulation. As noted above, in the present case, the assessee has not only filed the return of income late but also paid the taxes late. Thus ground No.2 & 3 is dismissed as the said decision is not applicable in the present case. That leaves the decision of Gujarat High Court in the case of Bharathbahi B Shah (supra). At the outset, the decision is given by Gujarat High Court which is not the jurisdictional High Court. That apart, even in this case the assessee has paid taxes before due date though belatedly filed the return of income. In the present....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Once the assessee has not paid taxes and not filed return of income in due time, the assessee cannot choose a working that is most suitable to him overriding the statutory provisions. (iii) Observing the principle of cassus omissus wherein what is not present in the law cannot be read into it, the assessee's calculation is unacceptable as the assessee is reading an intent that is absent in the Act itself which is to calculate 234A only on certain payments. (iv) In fiscal policy, interest is charged to compensate the loss of revenue to the exchequer. To that extent by not paying his taxes in time, the assessee has to bear the consequences in terms of compensatory interest. This cannot be treated as penal in nature but only compensatory. In Supreme Court's order in this case of CIT Vs. Anjum M H Ghoswala and others delivered on 18.10.2001 in Apex Court had an occasion to deliberate on the levy of interest under Section 234A/234B/234C. Their wisdoms are found as below : "We will have to examine the character of interest payable under the provisions of section 234A, 234B and 234C. A perusal of these sections shows that the interest for default in furnishing return of income....