Ii)Whether On The Facts And Circumstances Of The Case And In Law The Tribunal Correct In Allowing Appeal Of The Assessee That Interest On Interest Should Be All v. Cit(A) (280 Itr 643(Sc)) Are Entirely Different From The Facts Of The Present Case?

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 5146 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU)..Appellantversus M/s. Asian Paints (India) Ltd...Respondent -------- Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr. Subhash S. Shetty for the Respondent. ............. M.S.SANKLECHA, JJ. DATED :06[th] August, 2012 P. C.: 1This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') challenges the order dated 24.11.2008 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ('the Tribunal') relates to the Assessment year 1988-1989. 2The Revenue has formulated the following questions of law for the consideration of this Court : i) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was correct in law in allowinginterestoninterest (Compound Interest) against the provisions of Section 244A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? ii)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal correct in allowing appeal of the assessee that interest on interest should be allowed as the facts of the case in Sandvik Asia Ltd. v. CIT(A) (280 ITR 643(SC)) are entirely different from the facts of the present case? iii)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal is correct in allowing appeal of the assessee as in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd., the notice of demand was issued to the assessee for advancetaxpayableat Rs.2,74,31,250/- in A.Y.1977-78 while in the present case no such notice of demand was issued as seen from record? iv)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal correct in allowing appeal of the assessee as in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd., no interest was paid on advance tax even till the date of finalization of assessment whereas, in the present case, interest of Rs.6,25,314/- @ 15% for 14 months from 1[st] April, 1988 to date of regular assessment, was paid? v)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal is correct in allowing appeal of the assessee as in the case of present assessee, interest u/s. 244(1A) was given at Rs.4,40,325/- from the date of payment of regular demand to the date of CIT(A) order except interest u/s. 244(1A) at Rs.35,73,227/-? vi)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal correct in allowing appeal of the assessee as in the case of present assessee, interest payment of Rs.15.90 lacs was allowed by ITAT on advance tax payment from date of regular assessment to the date of CIT(A) order. The assessee further claimed interest on delayed payment of interest which was not granted by the AO. The CIT(A) also did not agree with the assessee in view of the decision in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd, (280 ITR 643 Bom), whereas, in the case of M/s. Sandvik Asia Ltd., the Apex Court has held that Revenue had taken erroneous view of law? 3 Mr. Suresh Kumar, Counsel for the Revenue states that questions (i) & (ii) would cover all the issues raised even in the questions (iii) to (vi). Therefore, aforesaid questions (i) and (ii) are being pressed for consideration of this court. 4 The issue raised in the present appeal is whether the respondent-assessee is entitled to receive interest from the appellant-revenue in respect of the delayed payment of interest by the appellant-revenue. 3 Mr. Suresh Kumar, Counsel for the Revenue states that questions (i) & (ii) would cover all the issues raised even in the questions (iii) to (vi). Therefore, aforesaid questions (i) and (ii) are being pressed for consideration of this court. 4 The issue raised in the present appeal is whether the respondent-assessee is entitled to receive interest from the appellant-revenue in respect of the delayed payment of interest by the appellant-revenue. 5The Tribunal by its order dated 24.11.2008 allowed the respondent-assessee's appeal by following the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Sandvik Asia Ltd v. Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune, reported in 150 Taxman, page 591. The aforesaid decision of the Apex Court while reversing the decision of this court held that the respondent-assessee was entitled to interest on delayed payment of interest. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to calculate the interest payable to the assessee on the delayed interest in accordance with the decision of the Apex Court in Sandvik Asia Ltd. (Supra). 6 In the circumstances, no substantial questions of law arises in questions (i) & (ii) above. 7The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.) (S.J.VAZIFDAR, J.)