TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tter was set aside. Respectfully following the said order the issue raised in ground no. 4 should be set aside to the files of the CIT (A) for fresh adjudication. Charging of interest u/s 234A 234B - HELD THAT:- As assessee submitted that the assessee being a notified person , there is no change of interest. It is his further submission that the receipts of the assessee are subjected to TDS. On the contrary, Special Counsel for the Revenue filed various decisions of the Tribunal in support of the change of interest. The judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Devine Holdings Pvt Ltd [ 2012 (4) TMI 100 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] was relied on by the Spl. Counsel for the Revenue. During the rebuttal time, Ld Counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come from attached assets can be assessed in the hands of the assessee. 4. The Ld CIT (A) has erred in law and in facts in not granting relief of liability amounting to ₹ 2,50,18,362/- towards interest expenditure claimed by the appellant. The CIT (A) ought to have held that the interest expenses to the extent of ₹ 86,05,786/- need to be allowed while calculating income of the appellant. 5. The Ld CIT (A) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the levy of interest u/s 234A and 234B of the Act. 3. At the outset, Shri Dharmesh Shah, Ld Counsel for the assessee mentioned that there is a delay of 63 days in filing the appeals before the ITAT for the AY 2003-04 and delay of 38 days for the AY 2004-05. In this re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Dharmesh Shah, Ld Counsel for the assessee mentioned that ground nos. 1, 2 3 are not pressed. After hearing the Ld Special Counsel, the said grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 6. Ground no. 4 relates to the disallowance of interest expenditure of ₹ 2,50,18,362/-. In this regard, at the outset, Ld Counsel mentioned that an identical issue came up for adjudication before the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Hitesh S. Mehta vs. DCIT vide ITA No. 7726 7727/M/2010 dated 26.4.2013, wherein the Tribunal set aside the issue to the files of CIT (A) for adjudication of the issue afresh by adjudicating the respective ground relating to the rejection / reliability of the books of account. Para 5 from the said order of the Tribunal (supra) i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on that the issue raised in ground no. 4 should be set aside to the files of the CIT (A) for fresh adjudication of the issue after granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The decision if any should be taken only after considering the decision in the case of Hitesh S Mehta, (supra). Accordingly, ground nos.4 is set aside. 9. Ground no. 5 relates to charging of interest u/s 234A 234B of the Act. In connection with the charge of interest u/s 234B of the Act, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee being a notified person , there is no change of interest. It is his further submission that the receipts of the assessee are subjected to TDS. On the contrary, Special Counsel for the Revenue filed vari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regard, at the outset, Ld Counsel for a the assessee brought our attention to the order of the Tribunal in quantum appeal vide ITA No. 4629/M/2011, dated 6.11.2013 and mentioned that the Tribunal (supra) has set aside the issue to the file of the CIT (A) for fresh adjudication. Therefore, the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) should also be set aside to the file of the CIT (A) in lieu of the said quantum appeal. On the other hand, Ld DR relied on the orders of the Revenue Authorities. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the said order of the Tribunal dated 6.11.2013 (supra), we find the quantum appeal was set aside by the Tribunal to file of the CIT (A). Considering the same, the we set aside the instant ground no. 3 also to the fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
