UDAIPUR MINERALS DEVELOPMENT, Jaipur v. ADD. CIT, Jaipur

ITA 43/JPR/2011 | 1992-1993
Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 4323114 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAAFU2725Q
Bench Jaipur
Appeal Number ITA 43/JPR/2011
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 3 day(s)
Appellant UDAIPUR MINERALS DEVELOPMENT, Jaipur
Respondent ADD. CIT, Jaipur
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 22-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 22-07-2011
Assessment Year 1992-1993
Appeal Filed On 18-01-2011
Judgment Text
1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JAIPUR BENCH B JAIPUR (BEFORE SHRI R.K.GUPTA AND SHRI N.L.KALRA) ITA NO.43/ JP/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 1992-93 PAN: AAAFU 2725 Q M/S. UDIAPUR MINERAL DEVELOPMENT VS. THE ADDL. CI T SYNDICATE (P) LTD. RANGE-1 GOLCHA TRADE CENTRE M.I. ROAD JAIPUR JAIPUR (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI A.B. DANGAYACH DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI K.C MEENA ORDER PER N.L. KALRA AM:- THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDE R OF THE LD. CIT(A) BIKANER (CAMP AT JAIPUR ) DATED 24-11-2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 1992- 93. 2.1 THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE AR E AS UNDER:- 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN REJECTING T HE APPLICATION OF THE APPELLANT FILED U/S 154 IN WHICH REQUEST WAS MADE FOR DELETION OF ENHANCEMENT OF INTEREST LEVIED U/S 220( 2) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 2 64 125/- 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E THE REJECTION OF APPLICATION FILED U/S 154 IS BAD IN LA W AND DESERVES TO BE QUASHED. 2 2.2 THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION U/S 154 OF TH E ACT BEFORE THE AO IN WHICH IT WAS STATED THAT INTEREST U/S 220(2) CANNOT BE INCREASED BECAUSE THE PROVISO TO SECTION 220(2) REFERS TO THE REDUCTION I N INTEREST. 2.3. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES. THE ISSUE IN R ESPECT OF CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S 220(2) HAS BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE TRIB UNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI SADHU RAM GOYAL (ITSSA NO. 13/JP/2010 DATED 10-03-2 011). THE TRIBUNAL WHILE REFERRING TO THE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDIC TIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SAMURAI SOFTWARE (P) LTD. 48 DTR 167 HELD THAT INTEREST U/S 220(2) CANNOT BE CHARGED FOR THE PERIOD DURING WHICH THE DEMAND WAS NOT SURVIVED ON THE ISSUE WHICH WAS DECIDED BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. HENCE INTEREST U/S 220(2) IS NOT CHA RGEABLE ON THE DEMAND RAISED AS A RESULT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FRO M THE DATE OF LD. CIT(A)S ORDER TO THE DATE OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. HEN CE IT WILL BE USEFUL TO REPRODUCE PARA 2.6 FROM THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL I N THE CASE OF SADHU RAM GOYAL (SUPRA) 2.6 BEFORE US THE LD. AR HAS RELIED UPON THE DEC ISION OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SAMURAI SOFTWARE (P) LTD 48 DTR 167. THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL H IGH COURT IN THAT CASE HELD THAT ORIGINAL DEMAND DID NOT SURV IVE WHEN THE ORDER IS RESTORED BACK BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE LD.AR H AS ALSO FILED THE COPY OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN THE CASE OF SAMUR AI SOFTWARE 3 (P) LTD. THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 22-01-2010 I N ITA NO. 677/ /JP/2009 AND C.O. NO.143/JP/09 HAD AN OCCA SION TO CONSIDER THE CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S 220(2) OF THE ACT VIDE ORDER U/S 154 BY THE AO FOR INCLUDING THE INTEREST CHARGEABLE U/S 220(2) FOR PERIOD FROM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT (A) AND TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THUS THE FACTS IN THE INSTAN T CASE ARE SIMILAR TO THE FACTS OF CIT VS. M/S. SAMURAI SOFTW ARE (P) LTD 48 DTR 167 (RAJ.). THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL HAS BE EN CONFIRMED BY THE HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT . HENCE THE ISSUE OF CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S 220(2) FOR THE PE RIOD FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE DATE OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT A DEBATABLE ISSUE AS THE DECISION OF HON'BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IS BINDING. HENCE CONSID ERING THE DECISION OF JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT WE THEREFORE HOLD THAT THE AO WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CHARGING THE INTEREST B ECAUSE THE ORIGINAL DEMAND NOTICE DOES NOT SURVIVE. HENCE THE ISSUE OF CHARGING OF INTEREST U/S 220(2) FOR THE PERIOD FRO M THE DATE OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE DATE OF THE ORDE R OF THE TRIBUNAL IS NOT CHARGEABLE IN BOTH THE APPEALS AND THE ASSESSEE WILL GET THE RELIEF TO THAT EXTENT. ACCORDINGLY THE AO WILL NOT CHARGE THE INTEREST U/S 220(2) OF THE ACT FOR THE PERIOD FROM THE DATE OF ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) TO THE DATE OF ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4 3. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PA RTLY ALLOWED. THE ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 22-07 -2011. SD/- SD/- (R.K. GUPTA) (N.L. KALRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JAIPUR DATED; 22 /07/2011 *MISHRA COPY FORWARDED TO :- 1. M/S. UDAIPUR MINERAL DEVELOLPMENT SYNDICATE (P) LTD . JAIPUR 2. THE ADDL. CIT RANGE1 JAIPUR 3. THE LD. CIT (A) JAIPUR 4. THE LD. CIT BY ORDER 5. THE LD.DR 6. THE GUARD FILE (ITA NO.43/JP /11) A.R ITAT JAIPUR 5 6