The Learned Tribunal Relying Upon The Earlier Decisionof The Supreme Court In The Case Of Sandvik Asia Ltd v. Cit(280 Itr 643) (Sc) Dismissed The Revenue's Appeals. Paragraphno. 3 Of The Tribunal Order Is Quoted Below For Ready Reference

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 20.03.2019CORAMTHE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARIANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYANTax Case Appeal Nos.813, 814, 816 to 819 of 2009 Commissioner of Income TaxChennai.Appellant/Appellant in all TCAsVs. M/s.Brakes India Ltd.,Padi, Chennai – 600 050PAN: AAACB2533Q Respondent/Respondent in all TCAs PRAYER IN T.C.A.No. 813 of 2009: This Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.02.2009 made inITA No.1558/Mds/2008. PRAYER IN T.C.A.No. 814 of 2009: This Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.02.2009 made inITA No.1559/Mds/2008. PRAYER IN T.C.A.No. 816 of 2009: This Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.02.2009 made inITA No.1561/Mds/2008. PRAYER IN T.C.A.No. 817 of 2009: This Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.02.2009 made inITA No.1562/Mds/2008. PRAYER IN T.C.A.No. 818 of 2009: This Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.02.2009 made inITA No.1563/Mds/2008. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ PRAYER IN T.C.A.No. 819 of 2009: This Tax Case Appeal filed under Section 260A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax AppellateTribunal, Madras 'C' Bench, Chennai, dated 06.02.2009 made inITA No.1564/Mds/2008, respectively. Against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(LTUAppeals)Anna Nagar, West Extension Chennai-600 101 inITA.No.7/2008-09 LTU(A), 1/2008-09, 2/2008-09, 3/2008-09,4/2008-09, 5/2008-09, 6/2008-09 LTU(A) dated 25.04.2008 againstthe Order of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CompanyCircle I(2) AAYAKARBHAVAN 6[th] Floor, 121, M.G.Road, Chennai-34made in ITA.Nos.728 to 730, 1080, 1682 Mds 199 and 702, 703,704, 1643 (mds)99 dated 25.01.2005 in PAN.AAACB2533 a/BY 1-026/1986-87, 1989-90, 1992-1993, 1994-1995 against the Order ofthe Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle1(2),Chennai-600 034, in GINo.BX1-026 dated 15.09.2005. For Appellant inall T.C.As.: Mr.T.Ravikumar Senior Standing CounselFor Respondent inall T.C.As: Mr.Vikram Vijayaraghavan for Mr. Subharaya Aiyer Padmanabhan The Revenue has filed these Appeals under Section 260-A ofthe Act raising the following substantial questions of lawarising from the order of the learned Tribunal dated 06.02.2009dismissing the Revenue's Appeals for the Assessment Years 1986-1987, 1989-1990 & 1990-1991 to 1994-1995:- “Whether in the facts andcircumstances of the case, theTribunal was right in holding that theRevenue should pay interest oninterest, where there is no inordinatedelay in payment of refund?” 2.The learned Tribunal relying upon the earlier decisionof the Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd., Vs. CIT(280 ITR 643) (SC) dismissed the Revenue's Appeals. ParagraphNo. 3 of the Tribunal order is quoted below for ready reference:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “3.Wehaveheardtherivalsubmissions in the light of material placedbefore us and precedent relied upon. Wefind that this issue stands covered infavour of the assessee by the decision ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in thecase of Sandvik Asia Limited., Vs. CIT (280ITR 643) (SC). Respectfully following theprecedent, we uphold the impugned order. In the result, appeals of the Revenuestand dismissed.” 2.The learned Tribunal relying upon the earlier decisionof the Supreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Ltd., Vs. CIT(280 ITR 643) (SC) dismissed the Revenue's Appeals. ParagraphNo. 3 of the Tribunal order is quoted below for ready reference:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “3.Wehaveheardtherivalsubmissions in the light of material placedbefore us and precedent relied upon. Wefind that this issue stands covered infavour of the assessee by the decision ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in thecase of Sandvik Asia Limited., Vs. CIT (280ITR 643) (SC). Respectfully following theprecedent, we uphold the impugned order. In the result, appeals of the Revenuestand dismissed.” 3.The learned counsel for the Appellant/Revenue hassubmitted before us that the aforesaid view of Hon'ble SupremeCourt in Sandvik Asia Limited., cited supra has since beenreversed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a later decision in thecase of CIT Vs. Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals (2013) 358 ITR 291 (SC)in which taking note of the said decision of Sandvik AsiaLimited as well as the later amendment of law with effect from01.04.1989 by insertion of Section 244A of the Act, the Hon'bleSupreme Court has clarified that it is only the interestprovided for under Section 244A of the Act which may be claimedby the Assessee on the refunds and no other interest can beclaimed by the Assessee. Paragraph No. 8 of the said Judgementof the Hon'ble Supreme Court is quoted below for readyreference:- “8. Further it is brought to ournotice that the Legislature by the Act No. 4of 1988 (w.e.f. 01.04.1989) has insertedSection 244A to the Act which provides forinterestonrefundsundervariouscontingencies. We clarify that it is onlythat interest provided for under the statutewhich may be claimed by an assessee from theRevenue and no other interest on suchstatutory interest.” 4.In view of the very foundation of the order of thelearned Tribunal, namely, the earlier Judgement of the Hon'bleSupreme Court in the case of Sandvik Asia Limited., having beentaken away by the later decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in thecase of CIT Vs. Gujarat Fluoro Chemicals, we remit the matterback to the learned Tribunal to decide the Appeals again inaccordance with law, in view of the later decision of theHon'ble Supreme Court and the amendment of law. 5. Accordingly, the appeals of the Revenue are disposed ofwithout answering the aforesaid question of law. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(Insp.Cell) //True Copy// Sub Assistant RegistrarvsgTo1.The Income Tax Appellant Tribunal,'C' Branch Chennai.2.The Commissioner of Income Tax (LTU Appeals)Anna Nagar, West Extension, Chennai-600 101.3.The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Company Circle I(2) AAYAKARBHAVAN,6[th] Floor, 121, M.G.Road,Chennai-34.+1cc to Mr.Subharaya Aiyer Padmanabhan, Advocate, S.R.No.27628+1cc to Mr.T.Ravikumar, Advocate, S.R.No.27626Tax Case Appeal Nos.813, 814,816 to 819 of 2009KS(CO)CS/08/05/2019