TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 995X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before him. In view of all of the above, in our considered view, we feel that it would be in the fitness of things to remand the matter back to the file of the CIT (Appeals) to examine the issue afresh after affording the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and make submissions and file details required in this regard. It is ordered accordingly. - Decided in favour of revenue for statistical purposes - I.T.A. No.1391/Bang/2014 - - - Dated:- 14-8-2015 - SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, JJ. For The Appellant : Shri Farhat Hussain Qureshi, CIT (D. R) For The Respondent : Shri Ajay Rotti, C. A. Per Shri Jason P. Boaz : This appeal by Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7,868 for one month (delay in payment); (ii) Interest under Section 220(2) from 1.4.2011 to 26.7.2011 on ₹ 480,20,78,937. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order dt.27.7.2011 passed under Section 154 of the Act for A.Y. 2007- 08, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT (Appeals) IV, Bangalore. From the grounds of appeal before the learned CIT (Appeals), it is seen that the assessee has raised the following issues before the CIT (Appeals) with regard to the charging of interest u/s.220(2) of the Act. (a) The Assessing Officer erred in charging interest u/s.220(2) of the Act amounting to ₹ 12,77,779 for a period prior to the date of regular assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act, without appreciating that the only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... may be urged at the time of hearing, it is humbly prayed that the order of the CIT (Appeals) be reversed and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter, amend or delete any of the grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal. 4. The Grounds raised at S.Nos. 1. 3 4 are general in nature and therefore no adjudication is called for thereon. 5. Ground No.2 : Charge of Interest u/s.220(2) of the Act ₹ 12,77,77,868 . 5.1 In this ground of appeal, Revenue contends that the learned CIT (Appeals) erred in deleting the charge of interest u/s.220(2) of the Act amounting to ₹ 12,77,77,868, following the decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in ITO Vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sidered the material on record; including the judicial decisions relied on by the learned CIT (Appeals) in the impugned order. At the outset, we are constrained to observe that the order of the learned CIT (Appeals) is not a speaking order. While the impugned order cites certain decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court / High Courts and states that the facts of the cited cases are identical to the facts of the assessee's case, it does not specify or elaborate as to how the facts of the cases are identical and how the decisions in the cited cases are applicable to the facts of the assessee's case. In fact, we find that the issues involved in the decisions cited by the learned CIT (Appeals) are different from the issue on hand, i. E. t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lear from the face of the impugned order of the Assessing Officer that the order under Section 154 of the Act has been passed to rectify the order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act and not intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. It is also clear that interest u/s.220(2) of the Act has been charged for the period after passing of the order of assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act. In this factual matrix, the reliance placed by the learned CIT (Appeals) on the above decisions is, in our view, totally misplaced. 5.3.4 We also find that in the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before the learned CIT (Appeals), the facts of the case have been wrongly stated. For instance, the assessee raised the ground that the Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
