TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 792X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mined by the CIT(A) and upheld by the ITAT disclose that even the tax liability finally determined was satisfied. In these circumstances, the addition of interest for the period during the pendency of the application before the settlement commission was entirely unwarranted. We do not see any reason to disturb the concurrent findings of fact. - Decided against revenue.. - ITA 404/2013, ITA 405/2013, ITA 408/2013 - - - Dated:- 21-5-2015 - MR. S. RAVINDRA BHAT AND MR. R.K. GAUBA, JJ. For The Revenue : Mr. P Roy Chaudhuri, sr. standing counsel For The Assessee : Mr. Piyush Kaushik, Adv. JUDGMENT MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT (OPEN COURT) 1. In these three appeals, the revenue urges that the common order of the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overed. While computing the amounts payable, the AO passed in his consequential order dated 4.5.2010, ₹13,03,211/- as interest recoverable for the period between 1.1.2004 and 26.3.2010. This addition was appealed to the CIT(A) as untenable. The CIT took note of the dates when these amounts were offered - soon after the admission of the application before the settlement commission and also the date on which the deposit was made pursuant to final order which was on 4.5.2010. This is to be found in the following chart, prepared by the CIT(A). The said chart is extracted below: Date of filing of Application u/s 245C(1) 11.12.2002 Date of admission of Application u/s 245D(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee does not deposit income tax payable on income disclosed and admitted under section 245D(1) of the Act. In the instant case, the appellant deposited ₹6,12,000/- within the time prescribed under Section 245D(2C) on the income of ₹10 lakhs as per order under Section 245D(1) in view of the admission. 5. It is thus apparent that there were clear findings rendered by the CIT(Appeals) with respect to the error in calculation of the interest payable, as per the AO s determination. 6. The ITAT has, in its decision, elaborately considered the provisions of Chapter XIX-A, more particularly the scope of the settlement commission s jurisdiction. It also took into consideration several authorities as well as the judgment of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
