TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1083X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mble understanding, we find that there was no question before the Hon ble Supreme Court whether the amount of refund granted by the Revenue first has to be adjusted against the interest or the principal. Accordingly, no benefit can be derived by the revenue based on the judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court cited above. As such, the issue on hand is identical to the controversy which was there before the Mumbai tribunal in [ 2016 (8) TMI 688 - ITAT MUMBAI] and the same has been resolved. The relevant extract of the order of the ITAT has already been reproduced somewhere in the preceding paragraph. In view of the above and after considering the facts in totality, we set aside the finding of the learned CIT (A) and direct the AO to allow the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as may be advised from time to time. 3. The only effective issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) erred in confirming the order of the AO by not calculating the exact amount of interest payable to the assessee on the amount of refund granted under section 244A of the Act. 4. The facts in brief are that the assessee in the present case is a HUF and filed the return of income having tax liability at rupees nil. Nevertheless, the assessee has paid the advanced tax amounting to Rs. 1,71,780/- only. However, the assessment was framed by the AO under section 143(3) of the Act at Rs. 1,98,813/- before deduction u/s 80C 80L vide order dated 13-03-1997. On appeal, the learned CIT (A) vide order dated 27-06-2017 has determi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not granted by the AO. The AO has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat Flouro Chemicals (2013) wherein it was held that interest provided for for under the statue which may be claimed by an assessee form the Revenue and no other interest on such statutory interest. Further, the AO has also cited the the judgement of Hon'ble Gujarat High court in the case of Nima Specific Family Trust vs. ACIT, Circle-5(2), Ahmedabad (SCA No. 7073 of 2018} wherein it was decided that the petitioner cannot claim any further interest as compensation over and above the statutory interest prescribed. In view of no specific provision in the statue to allow interest on interest and respectfully relying on the decisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. There is no dispute to the fact that the assessee has paid advanced tax of ₹ 1,71,780/- whereas the income was determined at rupees NIL. Accordingly, the amount of advance tax paid by the assessee became due to him (the assessee). The 1st refund of ₹ 1,09,410/- was granted by the revenue against the advance tax paid by the assessee. As on the date of refund of ₹1,09,410/-, the calculations made by the assessee and the revenue stand as under: a. As per the calculation of the assessee - Advance tax due to be refunded Rs. 1,71,780/- - Interest up to the da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee can claim the recovery of the interest amount out of the refund granted by the revenue or first the principal amount should be adjusted against the refund granted by the revenue. This controversy has been answered by Mumbai tribunal in the case of Union Bank of India vs. ACIT reported in 72 taxmann.com 348 wherein it was held as under: 3.10 It is noted from the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court that it has been observed that whatever money has been received by the department, it ought to be refunded ex aequo et bono. It is a Latin phrase which means 'what is just and fair' or 'according to equity and good conscience'. Something to be decided ex aequo et bono is something that is to be decided b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eported 24 taxmann.com 338 wherein the issue was different than the case on hand. The Hon ble Supreme Court has directed as under: 8. The argument in Sandvik Asia Ltd. (supra) on behalf of the assessee was that it was entitled to compensation by way of interest for the delay in payment of the amounts lawfully due to it which were wrongly withheld for a long period of seventeen years. Vide Paragraph (23) of Sandvik Asia Ltd. (supra), the Division Bench held that, in view of the express provisions of the Act, the assessee was entitled to compensation by way of interest for the delay in payment of the amounts lawfully due to the assessee, which were withheld wrongly by the Revenue. With due respect, Section 214 of the Act does not provide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
