TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 538
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....05 declaring NIL income after claiming deduction u/s. 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961(in short 'the Act'). The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessment was completed u/s.143(3) of the Act vide order dated 3/9/2007, wherein the 'book profit' u/s. 115JB of the Act was determined at Rs. 3,48,58,12,526/- after making an adjustment of Rs. 30,79,21,638/- for provision for doubtful debts u/s. 115JB(2) of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the above addition of Rs. 30,79,21,638/- on the ground that the provisions for doubtful debts did not fall under clause (c) of Explanation to section 115JB of the Act. This order of the Ld. CIT(A) was upheld by the Hon'ble ITAT. On further appeal by the Revenue against the order of the Tribunal,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s erred on facts and in law in deleting interest of Rs. 14,99,379/- charged u/s. 234C of the Act without properly appreciating the factual and legal matrix of the case as clearly brought out by the Assessing Officer. (ii) The Learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting Interest of Rs. 14,99,379/- charged u/s. 234C of the Act without properly appreciating the facts that the assessee has failed to pay advance tax liability arising due to respective amendment to section 115JB which was clearificatory in nature. 2. The Ld. CIT(A)'s order is contrary in law and on facts and deserves to be setaside. 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground that may be necessary. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ibunals and the decision has been rendered in favour of the assessee holding that where the assessee had no liability to pay advance tax instalments and became liable to do so by virtue of a retrospective amendment made after the close of the financial year, the assessee could not be held to be a defaulter in payment of advance tax and no interest could be charged upon it under section 234C of the Act. In support of this proposition, the Ld. Representative for the assessee placed reliance upon the following decision of Hon'ble Courts and Tribunals:- (i) Emami Ltd. vs. CIT (2011),337 ITR 470 (Cal); (ii) CIT v. JSW Energy Ltd. (2015) 379 ITR 36 (Bom); (iii)Shakti Insulated Wires (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 5814/Mum/2011 dat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have foreseen the amendment that will be made in future with retrospective effect. Hence, the advance tax paid by the assessee fell short. Accordingly he submitted that the interest u/s 234B and 234C could not be levied on the tax component attributable to the addition of "Provision for bad and doubtful debts". In this regard, he placed reliance on the decision of Co-ordinate bench of Tribunal, wherein one of us was the party, in the case of Garware Polyester ltd (2013)(33 taxmann.com 164)(Mum). The assessee also placed reliance on the decision of Delhi bench of Tribunal in the case of DCIT Vs. Uttam Sugar Mills Ltd (2012)(20 taxmann.com 223). 6.1 We heard Ld D.R and also have gone through the decision relied upon by the Ld A.R. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct situation. It was noted therein that from CBDT Order No. F 400/234/95-IT (B) dt. 21 st May, 1996, it was clear that the intention of the tax authorities was not to levy interest where any amendment came with retrospective effect. .." In our view, the ratio of the above said decision shall squarely apply to the facts of the instant case. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) on this issue and restore the same to the file of the AO with the direction to compute the interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act by excluding the addition relating to "Provision for bad and doubtful debts" from the amount of book profit. 4.3.2. We, respectfully, following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the cas....