Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1844 - AT - Income TaxInterest on the outstanding refund - case of the assessee is that it is entitled to claim of interest, on the interest which is part of the outstanding refund as it also constitute “amount to be refunded” to the assessee as on 20/03/1993, on which date the demand relevant to the Assessment Year 1992-93, was set off by AO - HELD THAT:- As decided in K. LAKSHMANYA AND COMPANY VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX & ANOTHER [2017 (11) TMI 589 - SUPREME COURT] the expression “due” only means that a refund becomes due if there is an order under the Act which either reduces or waives tax or interest. It is of no matter that the interest that is waived is discretionary in nature, for the moment that discretion is exercised, a concomitant right springs into being in favour of the assessee. We are, therefore of view that the C.I.T. (Appeals) and the ITAT were correct in their view and that consequently, the High Court was incorrect in its view that since a discretionary power has been exercised, no concomitant right was found for refund of interest to the assessee. Also in assessee's own case [2017 (8) TMI 237 - ITAT KOLKATA] the assessee is entitled for interest on unpaid interest and accordingly dismiss the grounds raised by the revenue in this regard. As decided in the assessee's own case for the very same assessment year 2002-03 had upheld the order of the learned Assessing Officer granting interest under section 244A of the Act. The subsequent rectification proceedings and the consequent appellate orders thereon have been reversed by the hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the assessee's own case. Hence the Revenue should not have any grievance in the impugned appeal before us as the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had addressed the entire issue in the same lines in which the hon'ble High Court had addressed the issue. In our considered opinion, if at all the Revenue is aggrieved against the order of the hon'ble Calcutta High Court [2015 (7) TMI 780 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] they should have preferred a special leave petition before the hon'ble Supreme Court. Assessee has given a computation of refund in the Annexure to his written submissions. AO is directed to verify the same and grant refund of the amount, in accordance with law
|