TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 850X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uch allocation as bad - the returns ought to have been filed showing the correct income - the advance tax was not paid, therefore, automatically they are liable to pay interest chargeable u/s 234B of the Act – Decided in favour of Revenue. - WA. No. 560 of 2010 - - - Dated:- 11-2-2014 - Dr. Manjula Chellur, CJ And A. M. Shaffique,JJ. For the Appellant : Sri. Jose Joseph, SC For the Respondent : Sri P. Balakrishnan, Adv JUDGMENT Manjula Chellur,CJ. Revenue is before us challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge in O.P. No.14606 of 2002. 2. We are concerned with the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93 pertaining to the party respondents. The facts leading to the present appeal in brief are as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rejecting the claim of waiver of interest by the respondents/partners. Aggrieved by the said orders, all partners filed OP No.14606 of 2002 when recovery proceedings came to be initiated as per Ext.P9. Said matter was disposed of opining that petitioners were entitled to the benefit of unabsorbed depreciation, therefore, the impugned orders deserve to be quashed. It was further declared that petitioners were not liable to pay any interest under Section 234B of the Act for the assessment years 1991-92 and 1992-93. Aggrieved by the said judgment of the learned Single Judge, Department is before us. 5. According to learned Standing Counsel for the Revenue, if any of the assessees was to get benefit of waiver of interest, it has to be in ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d with by the assessees before they make a claim for waiver of interest. The approach of learned Single Judge was entirely on a different footing. 7. According to learned Single Judge, there was no mistake or error on the part of the assessees in seeking the benefit of unabsorbed depreciation and they cannot be blamed because of the judgment of the Apex Court, which persuaded the authorities to rectify the order under Section 154 of the Act. Therefore, for no fault of them, if they did not pay the tax payable by them, they shall not be saddled with liability of interest under Section 234B. 8. One has to approach the controversy raised from two angles, that is, with reference to the conditions enumerated in Circular of 1996 and the fac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and 1992-93 on 30.10.1992, Judgment in Garden Silk Weaving Factory (supra) was rendered on 22.03.1991 much prior to the submission of returns for both the assessment years by the assessees. Once Supreme Court has laid down the law that depreciation of a firm cannot be allocated to the benefit of partners personally and it shall revert back to the firm, the assessees should have been careful enough to file their returns without claiming such unabsorbed depreciation in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court. Though 1989-90 assessment of the firm did allocate such unabsorbed depreciation, law of the land declared such allocation as bad. In the light of such observation of the Apex Court the returns ought to have been filed showing th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
