Itta/262/2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - Iv v. Nagarjuna Finance Ltd

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMAND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO I.T.T.A.No.262 of 2012 Date: 10.09.2012 Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax – IV,Hyderabad AND … Appellant Nagarjuna Finance Ltd.,1-2-599/600, 103, Reliance Mansion,Lower Tank Bund Road,Hyderabad … Respondent THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAOI.T.T.A.No.262 of 2012 ORDER(Per the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram): This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) is directed against the order of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘A’ Bench, dated30.01.2009 in I.T.A.No.68/H/2004 pertaining to the Assessment Year1998-99. The brief facts leading to present appeal may be noticed. Therespondent (assessee) filed its return of the income on 30.11.1998showing NIL income after adjusting unabsorbed depreciation/loss forthe Assessment Years 1996-97 and 1997-98 amounting toRs.27,81,37,991/-. The return was revised on 29.01.2001 showingcurrent year’s income at Rs.6,59,08,290/- which was adjusted againstunabsorbed depreciation/loss for the Assessment Year 1997-98 andthe net taxable income was shown as NIL. A refund ofRs.2,22,01,591/- was claimed on account of TDS of Rs.1,69,01,591/-and advance tax of Rs.53,00,000/-. The return was processed underSection 143(1)(a) of the Act on 30.09.1999. Credit for TDS ofRs.1,29,89,691/- and advance tax of Rs.25,00,000/-, in allRs.1,54,89,691/- was allowed and the amount refundable to theassessee including interest was calculated at Rs.1,82,77,819/-.Therefund was however withheld after obtaining approval from theCommissioner of Income Tax (CIT). Thereafter, regular assessmentunder Section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 15.02.2001 determining the total income at Rs.34,12,48,010/- on which the netincome tax payable was worked out at Rs.16,57,95,368/-. Thereafter,the assessment was revised under Section 154 of the Act on04.06.2001 and the total income was computed at Rs.28,34,11,990/-and the net tax payable was determined at Rs.9,82,73,535/-. Pursuant to the order of the CIT (Appeals) dated 25.02.2002, aconsequent order was passed on 15.04.2002 wherein the revised totalincome was computed at Rs.77,93,424/- and the refund payable to theassessee was specified as Rs.4,80,28,969/-. On 01.04.2003 the assessee claimed credit for MAT for theAssessment Year 1997-98 at Rs.88,74,800/-. On this application, theAssessing Officer passed an order under Section 154 of the Act on29.07.2003 allowing MAT credit to the extent of Rs.27,27,698/- andrefunded the tax of Rs.27,27,698/- which was demanded and collectedfrom the assessee, however without granting payment of interest onthe quantum of refunded tax. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred anappeal to the CIT (Appeals). This appeal was allowed by the orderdated 27.11.2003. Before the CIT (Appeals), the Revenue specificallycontended that in effect the assessee was claiming interest on theMAT credit. Rejecting this contention, the CIT (Appeals) held that bythe consequent order dated 15.04.2002, the Assessing Officer hadissued refund for the tax already collected and what the assessee wasclaiming was not interest on MAT paid for the preceding assessmentyear but interest on refund to the extent it is attributable to advance taxand TDS. Allowing the appeal of the assessee, the CIT (Appeals)held that the assessee was entitled to interest under Section 244 (A)(1)of the Act on the refund of Rs.27,27,698/- granted vide the rectificationorder dated 29.07.2003. The Revenue preferred an appeal to the Tribunal which wasrejected by the order impugned. The Tribunal concurred with thefinding and reasoning of the CIT (Appeals) and held that what wasclaimed by the assessee was only interest in respect of the advance tax and TDS paid by it and not on MAT credit. The Revenue preferred an appeal to the Tribunal which wasrejected by the order impugned. The Tribunal concurred with thefinding and reasoning of the CIT (Appeals) and held that what wasclaimed by the assessee was only interest in respect of the advance tax and TDS paid by it and not on MAT credit. We find no question of law let alone a substantial question oflaw falling for consideration in this appeal preferred against concurrentfindings of fact. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed at the stage ofadmission. No costs however. JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM Date: 10.09.2012va JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAMANDTHE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO va I.T.T.A.No.262 of 2012 (order of the Bench delivered by the Hon’ble Sri Justice Goda Raghuram) Date: 10.09.2012