Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2022 (5) TMI 1410

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... alleged short-levy of interest under section 234D is not a mistake apparent from record and accordingly outside the purview of rectification of mistakes under section 154. 1.2. The learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the claim of the appellant that two views are possible in this case and hence, it cannot be a case of rectification under section 154. 2. Excess levy of interest under section 234D of Rs. 4,00,73,87 2 2.1. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of excess interest under section 234D of Rs.4,00,73,872 for the month of March 2014. 2.2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that interest under section 234D is applicable only for 11 months (i.e. from 1 April 2014 to 27 February 2015) as against for 12 months considered by the assessing officer. 2.3. The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that date of grant of refund is same as the date of receipt of refund order / cheque. 2.4. The learned CIT(A) erred in not following the judgement of the jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Pfizer Ltd (191 ITR 626) and jurisdiction Mumbai ITAT in the case of Rajashekhar Swaminathan Iyer v. DCIT (73 taxmann.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d order. 6. Each one of the above grounds of appeal is without prejudice to the other. 7. The appellant reserves the right to amend, alter or add to the grounds of appeal." 3. The first issue to be decided in present appeal is pertaining to validity of rectification order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154 of the Act. 4. The brief facts of the case pertaining to this issue, as emanating from the record are: Assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Act was passed, in the case of the assessee, on 27/02/2015 determining total income at Rs. 17454,87,39,709. During the audit, it was observed that the assessee was granted refund of Rs. 8471,56,05,701 on 31/03/2014 after summary assessment. However, after scrutiny assessment, due to certain additions, refund to the tune of Rs. 801,47,74,461 was found to be made in excess. Assessing Officer vide rectification order dated 14/03/2017 passed under section 154 of the Act held that assessee was liable for interest under section 234D for a period of 12 months i.e. from March, 2014 to February, 2015. However, as interest under section 234D amounting to Rs. 44,08,12,595 was levi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ial available on record. The proceedings resulting in the present appeal is pursuant to the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154 of the Act. After passing of the assessment order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) of the Act, Assessing Officer found that interest under section 234D in respect of the excess refund granted to the assessee was levied only for 11 months instead of 12 months i.e. from March, 2014 to February, 2015. As a result, vide rectification order dated 14/03/2017 passed under section 154 of the Act, Rs. 4,00,73,872 was charged as short levy of interest under section 234D of the Act. As noted above, assessee before the learned CIT(A) submitted that the issue, whether interest under section 234D of the Act will be levied from the date of grant of refund or from the date of receipt of cheque of refund, is a debatable issue and thus, is outside the purview of the provisions of section 154 of the Act. The learned AR placed reliance upon the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in Development Bank of Singapore (supra) to submit that the issue is contentious in nature. We find that in Development Bank of Singapore (supra), the Co-ordi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....paid under section 199, during the financial year immediately preceding the assessment year, such interest shall be calculated at the prescribed rate for every month or part of a month comprised in the period from the 1st day of April of the assessment year to the 'date on which the refund is granted'. Similarly, clause (b) providing for interest in any other case, states that such interest shall be calculated at the specified rate for every month or part of a month comprised in the period or periods from the date of payment of the tax or penalty 'to the date on which the refund is granted'. Thus it is manifest that the terminating point for the calculation of interest u/s 244A is the date on which the refund is granted. It is axiomatic that invariably the actual date of receipt by the assessee will succeed the date of granting or issuance of refund. A cheque for refund with interest having been prepared is signed by the competent authority. After making due entries in the record, it goes for dispatch and only thereafter it is actually received by the assessee. On receipt, the assessee deposits such cheque in his bank account which further takes a few days in realiz....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nction between "the date of grant of refund" and "the date of receipt of refund". These two expressions have different connotations. Whereas the first refers to the date on which refund is issued, the second refers to the date on which it is actually received by the assessee. The legislature in its wisdom has employed the expression "date of receipt" in several sections, such as section 155(8A) before its omission and certain sections providing exemption under the head 'Capital gains'. To claim that the date of receipt of refund should be reckoned as a starting point instead of the date of grant of refund, in our considered opinion, would amount to doing violence to the unambiguous language of the provision. As it is the expression 'date of grant of refund' which has been employed u/s 234D, which in the present case is 29.10.2004, we hold that the interest has been rightly charged from this date. This ground is, therefore, not allowed." 9. Thus, while holding that interest under section 234D shall be charged from the date of grant of refund, the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal in the aforesaid decision, inter-alia, referred to the similar expression used in section....