TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uestions of law Nos.1 and 2 are answered in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Tulsyan NEC Limited [2010 (12) TMI 23 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]. Interest u/s 234D - Held that:- The date from which interest is leviable is not an issue before this Court and it is not a substantive question of law framed for consideration in this appeal. Nevertheless, the submission of the learned counsel for the Assessee has been noted because it would be a consequential proceedings, which will flow from the answers given by us to the substantial questions of law 3 and 4. Therefore, it is well open to the Assessee to canvass all these issues before the Assessing Officer, while computation of interest takes place. With the above observatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment years were prior to the introduction of the section ? 3. Heard Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue and Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan, learned counsel for the respondent/Assessee. 4. So far as the substantial questions of law Nos.1 and 2 are concerned, the issue has no longer res integra and has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. Tulsyan NEC Ltd., (2011) 330 ITR 0226. The issue involved in the batch of appeals before the Supreme Court filed by the Department was relating to the question as to whether MAT Credit admissible in terms of Section 115JAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act ) has to be set off against the tax payable (assessed tax) before calculat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ). 7. Learned counsel for the Assessee pointed out that though the question of law has been answered in the above terms, the period, for which, interest is leviable can be only from 01.06.2003. In this regard, reliance was placed on the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka in CIT V. Fanuc India Limited, (2011) 244 CTR 0529. In the said case, the appeal filed by the Revenue challenged the order passed by the Tribunal, which affirmed the finding of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who held that no interest is payable by the Assessee from the date of refund till 01.06.2003. The substantial question of law, which was framed for consideration in the said case was as hereunder : 4. The substantial ques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITR 578 (Del). 10. Mr.T.Ravi Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Revenue pointed out that the date from which interest is leviable is not an issue before this Court and it is not a substantive question of law framed for consideration in this appeal. Nevertheless, the submission of the learned counsel for the Assessee has been noted because it would be a consequential proceedings, which will flow from the answers given by us to the substantial questions of law 3 and 4. Therefore, it is well open to the Assessee to canvass all these issues before the Assessing Officer, while computation of interest takes place. 11. With the above observations, the Tax Case Appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed and the substantial quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
