TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5JB of the Act. The aforesaid argument of the assessee cannot be faulted.Accordingly, we set-aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer not to levy interest u/s 234B of the Act with respect to the addition relating to Provision for bad and doubtful debt made while computing the tax liability u/s 115JB of the Act. Thus, the assessee succeeds on this aspect. The action of Assessing Officer in the course of disposing of assessee’s impugned application u/s 154 of the Act belies the stand of the Revenue. Notably, in its application seeking rectification of the interest charged u/s 234B of the Act, assessee also claimed that interest u/s 234D of the Act was wrongly charged, and also that the credit for tax was not correctly gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is, inter-alia, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of petrochemical products. The assessee-company submitted its return of income on 29.11.2003 declaring income of Rs. Nil under normal provisions and ₹ 240,50,25,600/- u/s 115JB of the Act. Assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was made vide order dated 28.2.2006 determining the taxable income at Rs. Nil after setting-off brought forward losses and income u/s 115JB of the Act was computed at ₹ 298,45,51,667/-. The CIT(A) passed an order dated 26.11.2007 and thereafter assessee approached the Tribunal, which passed an order dated 29.6.2012. Pursuant to the order of the Tribunal, Assessing Officer passed an order dated 4.10.2012 givi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on the additions made consequent to any retrospective amendment to any of the provisions of the Act. Thus, he upheld levy of interest u/s 234B of the Act. 3. Before us, there is no dispute to the fact that the interest u/s 234B of the Act has been charged in the present case as a consequence of an addition made to the total income u/s 115JB of the Act in view of a retrospective amendment. In other words, as on the end of the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the relevant provision was not in the statute book but was introduced subsequently by Finance Act (No. 2) of 2009 to Sec. 115JB of the Act with retrospective effect from 1.4.2001. The plea of the assessee is that in such a situation, interest u/s 23 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bad and doubtful debts was liable to be assessed for determining the income u/s 115JB of the Act. The aforesaid argument of the assessee cannot be faulted and in fact, the aforesaid decisions relied upon by the assessee clearly support the assertion that interest u/s 234B of the Act is not chargeable in such situations. Therefore, we find no merit in the objections raised by the Revenue. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer not to levy interest u/s 234B of the Act with respect to the addition relating to Provision for bad and doubtful debt made while computing the tax liability u/s 115JB of the Act. Thus, the assessee succeeds on this aspect. 6. Before parting, we may also note another point made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
