TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Holdings Pvt. Ltd. [2012 (4) TMI 100 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and Cascade Holdings Pvt. Ltd.[2014 (4) TMI 973 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ]that the provision of sections 234A, 234B and 234C are mandatory in nature and would also apply to the notified entities also. The ld. Counsel submitted that the Tribunal, by following the above said decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in assessment year 2007-08, has held that the assessee would be liable to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has preferred an appeal against the said decision of the Tribunal before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and the same is pending. The ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee has filed a declaration in For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gly other grounds are dismissed as Not Pressed. 3. The grounds urged in AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 are identical in nature. At the time of hearing, the Ld A.R pressed the grounds relating to the following issues:- a) Rejection of claim of interest expenditure under the normal provisions of the Act; b) Rejection of interest liability under section 115JB of the Act; and c) Computation of interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. Accordingly, the remaining grounds and also the additional ground urged by the assessee are dismissed as not pressed. 4. The issue relating to rejection of interest claim in AY 2004-05 to 200607 and also the issues relating to interest listed as (a) and (b) above in AY 2008-09 to 2010-11 go together. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... favour of the Revenue. 5. We have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below. While disposing the ground relating to the disallowance of interest, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the findings given in the case of Eminent Holdings Pvt. Ltd. We find that the Tribunal in the case of Eminent Holdings in ITA Nos. 2139, 2140 and 2141/Mum/2013 have followed the decision of the Tribunal given in common group case of Hitesh S. Mehta at para 2.3 of the order and restored the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Respectfully following the findings of the Co ordinate Bench, we restore this issue to the files of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B and 234C of the Act is being agitated, since the assessee was disabled from paying advance tax by attaching all the assets belonging to the assessee and (b) manner of computation of interest u/s 234B and 234C, if it is held that the assessee is liable to pay advance tax. 8. With regard to the first issue, the Hon ble Bombay High Court has already held in the case of Divine Holdings Pvt Ltd and Cascade Holdings Pvt. Ltd that the provision of sections 234A, 234B and 234C are mandatory in nature and would also apply to the notified entities also. The ld. Counsel submitted that the Tribunal, by following the above said decisions of Hon ble Bombay High Court in assessment year 2007-08, has held that the assessee would be liable to pay inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applied to the present appeals in accordance with sub-section (5) of section 158A of the Act. Accordingly, this ground for all the three years is decided against the assessee in the manner aforesaid. By following the above said decision, we also set aside this matter with similar directions. 10. With regard to the second limb, the Ld A.R submitted that the interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act should be computed, after deducting the tax deductible at source from the income of the assessee. In support of this contention, he invited our attention to the decision rendered by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case for AY 2001-02 to 2003-04 (supra). A perusal of the above order of the Tribunal, we notice that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the following decisions. He relied upon the cases of Motorola inc. v. DCIT [95 ITD 269 (Del.(SB)], Sedco Fores Drilling Co. Ltd. [264 ITR 320],NGC Network Asia LLC [313 ITR 187] ,Summit Bhatacharya [ 300 ITR (AT) 347 (Bom)(SB)], Vijal Gopal Jindal [ITA No. 4333/Del/2009] Emillo Ruiz Berdejo [320 ITR 190 (Bom)].DR relied upon the cases of Devine Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 3.1. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that in the case of Devine Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Hon ble Bombay High Court has held that provisions of section 234A, 234B and 234C were applicable to the notified person also. Therefore, upholding the order of the FAA to that extent, we hold that provisions of section 234 of the Act are app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
