ADIT (IT) 1(1), MUMBAI v. A.P. MOLLER, MUMBAI

ITA 1576/MUM/2010 | 2001-2002
Pronouncement Date: 28-01-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 157619914 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AAACA8917F
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1576/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 11 month(s) 1 day(s)
Appellant ADIT (IT) 1(1), MUMBAI
Respondent A.P. MOLLER, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 28-01-2011
Assessment Year 2001-2002
Appeal Filed On 26-02-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES A BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL (A.M) AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAG HAVAN (JM) ITA NO. 1576/MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 A.D.I.T. (IT) -1(1) IST FL. R. NO. 117 SCINDIA HOUSE BALLARD ESTATE N.M. ROAD MUMBAI 38. VS. M/S A.P. MOLLER C/O MAERSIK INDIA P. LTD. DR. ANNIE BESANT ROAD WORLI COLONY MUMBAI. 30 PAN AAACA 8917F APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY SHRI S.K. PAHWA RESPONDENT BY SHRI JITESH JHANKH ARIA ORDER PER ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-10 DT. 23.12.2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 01-02. 2. THE DDIT LEVIED INTEREST OF RS. 13 54 303/- U /S. 234D OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IN APPEAL SUBMITTED THAT SECTION 234D OF T HE ACT WAS INSERTED W.E.F. 1 ST JUNE 2003 AND THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER APPEAL IS 2001-02 AND THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234D ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO TH E FACTS OF THE CASE. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HELD AS FOLLOWS: THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 234D INSERTED W.E.F. 1 ST JUNE 2003 THEREFORE THESE ARE APPLICABLE FROM A.Y. 2004-05 AS LAID DOWN BY HONBLE SPECIAL BENCH DELHI IN THE CASE OF M/S. EKTA PROMOTERS (P) LTD (3 05 ITR (6) (DEL) (SPL. BENCH) AND THE JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUNAL MUMBAI IN TH E CASE OF VAN CORD DREDING & MARINE CONTRACTORS (297 ITR 115 (AT(MUM). THEREFORE NO INTEREST U/S. 234D COULD BE CHARGED IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT FOR 2003-04. THIS GROUND IS THEREFORE ALLOWED IN FAVOUR OF THE A SSESSEE. 4. AGGRIEVED REVENUE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE US . M/S A.P. MOLLER 2 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE ARGUMENTS OF BOTH THE SIDES AN D ALSO PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT A SIMILA R VIEW AS THAT OF THE LD. CIT(A)WAS TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S BAJAJ HINDUSTAN LTD. AND WHILE CHALLENGING THE SAID DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN AN APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT THE FOLLOWING QUESTION OF LAW WAS SOUGHT TO BE RAISED BY THE REVENUE: WHETHER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE ITAT WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE INTEREST U/S 234 D CANNOT BE CHALLENGED IN RESPECT OF REFUNDS GRANTED PRIOR TO 1 .6.03 6. THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT VIDE ITS JUDGMENT DATED 15.4.09 PASSED IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 198 OF 2009 HAS HEL D THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234D HAVING COME ON STATUTE BOOK ONLY W.E.F . 1.6.03 AND THE SAID PROVISIONS HAVING NO RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT NO SUBST ANTIAL QUESTION OF LAW ARISES AS SOUGHT TO BE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ITS APPEAL . THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEALS THUS NOW STANDS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. BA JAJ HINDUSTAN LTD. (SUPRA) AND RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAME WE UPH OLD THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) DELETING THE INTEREST CHARGED BY THE A.O. U/S 234D AS THE CORRESPONDING REFUNDS FOR BOTH THE YEARS UNDER CONS IDERATION WERE ADMITTEDLY GRANTED PRIOR TO 1.6.03. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REV ENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 28 TH DAY OF JANUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (R.S. SYAL) (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (JUDICIAL MEMBER) MUMBAI DATED 28 TH JANUARY 2011 RJ M/S A.P. MOLLER 3 COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 10 MUMBAI 4. THE DIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) MUMBAI 5. THE DR BENCH A 6. MASTER FILE // TUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI M/S A.P. MOLLER 4 DATE INITIALS 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON: 25.01.2011 SR. PS/PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR: 25.01.2011 ______ SR . PS/PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER: ______ JM/AM 4. DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER: ______ JM/AM 5. APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS: SR. PS/ PS 6. KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON: ______ SR. PS/PS 7. FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK: ______ SR. PS/PS 8. DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK: ______ 9 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE AR 10. DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER: ______