TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (5) TMI 480
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Against the findings of the ld CIT(A), the Revenue moved an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal confirmed the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and against the said findings, the Revenue moved in further appeal before the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court and by order in DB Appeal No. 932/2008 dated 26.05.2017, the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court allowed the appeal of the Revenue and revived the order passed by Assessing officer. Pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble High Court, the AO passed the consequential appeal effect order dated 17.07.2017 wherein the total income was determined at Rs. 2,05,16,387/- raising the total demand of Rs. 1,32,15,354/- towards tax and interest. Thereafter, the assessee moved an application u/s 154 stating that interest u/s 234B and 234D were wrongly computed. However, the contentions so advanced by the assessee in the said application were not found acceptable to Assessing officer and he disposed off the application so filed by the assessee vide order dated 26.10.2017. However while passing the said rectification order, short credit of taxes paid by way of regular challans was allowed and as against the initial demand of Rs. 1,32,15,354/-, demand was reduc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this section is increased, the assessee shall be liable to pay interest under sub-section (2) from the day immediately following the end of the period mentioned in the first notice of demand, referred to in sub-section (1) and ending with the day on which the amount is paid: 6. It was submitted by the ld AR that the second proviso speaks only of sections referred in the earlier proviso which are "section 154, or section 155, or section 250, or section 254, or section 260, or section 262, or section 264 or an order of the Settlement Commission under sub-section (4) of section 245D." These do not include section 260A at all. It was accordingly submitted that the Assessing Officer was not justified in rejecting the application of the assessee on the basis of the said proviso. Similarly learned CIT(A) also erred in upholding the order of the learned Assessing Officer without appreciating the relevant provisions of law. Further, it has been contended that where the assessee is not in default and the demand has been paid, the assessee can be subject to levy of interest u/s 220(2) and reliance was placed on the Hon'ble Supreme Court decision in case of Vikrant Tyres vs ITO (2001) 247 I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....008 and the second refund has been issued on 9.04.2014 and by that time, the assessment has already been completed on 27.12.2006. It was accordingly submitted that the refund so issued is not a refund which is granted to the assessee under section 143(1) but a refund pursuant to relief granted by the ld CIT(A) and therefore, no interest can be charged under section 234D of the Act. It was further submitted that the Assessing officer has charged interest for the period starting the date of refund of first refund 6.2.2008 and till the date of the appeal effect order passed in the month of October 2017 where as the requirement of the law is that such interest can be charged for the period from the date of grant of refund to the date of such regular assessment. 9. The ld DR is heard who has submitted that the amended provisions of section 220(2) are clearly attracted in the instant case and interest under section 220(2) has been rightly levied by the AO and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Vikrant Tyres doesn't support the case of the assessee as the same has been rendered in context of pre-amended provisions. Further, he relied on the findings of the lower autho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der said sections or section 263, the amount on which interest was payable under this section is increased, the assessee shall be liable to pay interest under sub-section (2) from the day immediately following the end of the period mentioned in the first notice of demand, referred to in sub-section (1) and ending with the day on which the amount is paid. Therefore, in the instant case, the assessee shall be liable to pay interest u/s 220(2) from the expiry of period mentioned in the original notice of demand dated 27.12.2006 and ending with the day when the same is paid. On perusal of the working of interest u/s 220(2) as computed by the Assessing officer, we find that the same has been calculated for the period starting February 2007 (expiry of one month from date of original notice u/s 156 dated 27.12.2006) till October 2017 (date of the Hon'ble High Court order) and spilt calculation has been done by the Assessing officer taking into account payment of regular taxes on 17.03.2007, 31.03.2007 and 8.4.2010. The amount so paid have apparently been first adjusted against the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B, 234C and 234D and balance amount has been adjusted against the outstanding t....