TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 1305X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TMI 823 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] there would be no liability to pay interest under section 234B of the Act in view of a retrospective amendment made to section 115JB of the Act. This on the ground that at the time of making the payment of advance tax the respondent was under no obligation to pay advance tax and the same arose only on account of retrospective amendment to the law which came post the conclusion of the previous year relevant to the subject assessment year.The liability to interest under section 234B of the Act would only arise as a con sequence of failure to pay advance tax. No substantial question of law. Addition outstanding creditors under section 41(1) - liabilities had been outstanding for more than three years and had cea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal is justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 11,51,24,333 to the income of the assessee-company made by the Assessing Officer on account of guarantee commission chargeable to its associated enterprises ? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in deleting the interest charged under section 234B of the Act in view of the Supreme Court decision in Joint CIT v. Rolta India Ltd. [2011] 330 ITR 470 (SC) ? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer amounting to ₹ 6,88,842 on account of outstanding creditors un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted position that the issue arising herein was a subject matter of consideration by this court in CIT v. JSW Energy Ltd. [2015] 379 ITR 36 (Bom). In the above decision this court held that there would be no liability to pay interest under section 234B of the Act in view of a retrospective amendment made to section 115JB of the Act. This on the ground that at the time of making the payment of advance tax the respondent was under no obligation to pay advance tax and the same arose only on account of retrospective amendment to the law which came post the conclusion of the previous year relevant to the subject assessment year. The aforesaid decision of this court in JSW Energy Ltd. (supra) followed and approved the decision of the Calcutta High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 27, 2012. However the Revenue preferred an appeal from the order of the Tribunal dated July 27, 2012 relating to the assessment year 2006-07 being Income Tax Appeal No. 321 of 2013 to this court. By an order dated February 4, 2015 this court did not entertain the appeal on an identical question as raised herein. No distinction in facts and/or in law in this assessment year to that existing in the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 has been shown to us which would require taking a different view. (c) Therefore for the reasons recorded in our order dated February 4, 2015 Income Tax Appeal No. 321 of 2013 (CIT v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd.) this question is not being entertained. (d) The question as raised does not give rise to any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
