2026 (4) TMI 579

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Limitation Act, 1963. Ms. Shashi M. Kapila, learned counsel for the respondent accepts notice. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, the delay of 67 days in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The application stands allowed accordingly. CM APPL. 20836/2026 (delay of 120 days in refiling the appeal) 4. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay of 120 days in refiling the appeal is condoned. 5. The Application is allowed. ITA 277/2026 6. The following Substantial questions of law have been proposed by the Income Tax Department in the instant appeal : A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ITAT erred in sustaining the deletion made by the Ld. CIT(A) of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er another. 9. The question No. A is concerned, the same has been decided against the Department by the Judgment dated 11.03.2020 passed by this Court in ITA 186/2020 DCIT, Circle-25(1), New Delhi V. Tata Power Delhi Distribution Ltd, NC: 2020:DHC:1650-DB. Hence, we decide ground no. A against the appellant. 10. So far as the question No. B is concerned, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) [CIT(A)] has dealt with the relevant agreements and bylaws of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and came to the conclusion that as per the existent law, the energy tax is required to be paid as and when the same is collected from the customers. Such finding of fact has been affirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....learned counsel through accepted that previous orders for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 remain unassailed, as the tax effect involved in those appeals was less than the permissible limits for which an appeal could be filed, but nevertheless contended that this question requires consideration. 14. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant we are of the view that the Tribunal has taken a correct view. 15. The AO had disallowed the interest which the respondent-assessee was statutorily obliged to pay to the consumers on the security amount deposited. The amount of interest paid on security deposit cannot be said to be contingent, as every consumer is entitled to receive interest on the security money which it had deposited with the respon....