2016 (6) TMI 966

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....L KURESHI) 1. This group of appeals involve the same assessee and identical question is presented by the Revenue for our consideration, which reads as under: "Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in law and on facts in cancelling the interest charged u/s 201(1A)?" 2. Facts may be noted from Tax Appeal No.479 of 2016. 3. The appeal concerns assessment year 2007-08. The respon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for such purpose, relied on the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of CIT vs. Rishikesh Apartments Cooperative Housing Society Ltd reported in 253 ITR 310. The Tribunal recorded that KPT had paid advance tax of Rs. 43.48 crores for the assessment year 2007-08 and had claimed refund of Rs. 9.44 lacs and the return filed on 31.10.2007. Likewise, in the assessment year 2008-09, the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he present case, it is not in dispute that Ravi Builder, on whose behalf the tax was to be deducted and paid under Section 194C of the Act had paid more amount of tax by way of advance tax than what was payable and had also paid tax on selfassessment. Thus, it is not at all in dispute that for the relevant two years the amount of tax was paid by Ravi Builder on its income as per the provisions of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e by the assessee. 12. From the legal provisions discussed hereinabove, it is crystal clear that in the instant case Ravi Builder, on whose behalf the tax was to be paid by the assessee, had duly paid its tax and was not required to pay any tax to the Revenue in respect of the income earned by it from the assessee. If the tax was duly paid and that too at the time when it had become due, it woul....