Thelearnedcounselappearingfortherespondent/Assessee Fairly Submits That The Above Substantialquestion Of Law Has Been Answered Against The Assessee By Thehon'bl v. Following The Above Referred Decision, The Appeal, Filedby The Revenue, Is Allowed And The Substantial Question Of Lawis Answered In Favour Of The Revenue. No C
High Court
12 Nov 2018 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · hc_cis_mas
Parties
Thelearnedcounselappearingfortherespondent/Assessee Fairly Submits That The Above Substantialquestion Of Law Has Been Answered Against The Assessee By Thehon'bl v. Following The Above Referred Decision, The Appeal, Filedby The Revenue, Is Allowed And The Substantial Question Of Lawis Answered In Favour Of The Revenue. No C
Date of order
12 Nov 2018
Assessment year(s)
1997-98
Outcome
Allowed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Thelearnedcounselappearingfortherespondent/Assessee Fairly Submits That The Above Substantialquestion Of Law Has Been Answered Against The Assessee By Thehon'bl v. Following The Above Referred Decision, The Appeal, Filedby The Revenue, Is Allowed And The Substantial Question Of Lawis Answered In Favour Of The Revenue. No C, the High Court (2018) allowed the appeal under Section 234B, Section 234C of the Income-tax Act. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: 2.The above appeal has been admitted on 24.04.2009, on thefollowing substantial question of law:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ “Whether in the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in holding thatthe interest under Section 234C cannot be leviedwhere the assessment is completed unde...
Decision: 4.Following the above referred decision, the appeal, filedby the Revenue, is allowed and the substantial question of lawis answered in favour of the Revenue.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAMandTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
Tax Case (Appeal) No.273 of 2009
The Commissioner of Income-tax,Coimbatore.
... Appellant -vs-
M/s.Rajashree Sugars & Chemicals Ltd.,338, Avinashi Road, Peela Medu,Coimbatore-4.
... Respondent
Tax Case (Appeal) filed under Section 260-A of the IncomeTax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income-tax AppellateTribunal “D” Bench, Chennai dated 30.11.2005 passed inI.T.A.No.1334/Mds/2002 for the assessment year 1997-98, againstthe order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) Coimbatoredated 05/05/2002 in I.T.Appeal NO.84-C/2000-01.
against the order of the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,Special Range-I, Coimbatore dated 21/03/2000.
For Appellant:Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, Senior Standing Counsel
For Respondent :Mr.Vijaya Raghavan
for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar and Padmanaban
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.)
This appeal, by the Revenue, is directed against the orderof the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Chennai dated30.11.2005 passed in I.T.A.No.1334/Mds/2002 for the assessmentyear 1997-98.
2.The above appeal has been admitted on 24.04.2009, on thefollowing substantial question of law:-
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
“Whether in the facts and circumstances ofthe case, the Tribunal was right in holding thatthe interest under Section 234C cannot be leviedwhere the assessment is completed under Section115JA”
3.Thelearnedcounselappearingfortherespondent/assessee fairly submits that the above substantialquestion of law has been answered against the assessee by theHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Joint Commissioner ofIncome Tax vs. Rolta India Ltd., (2011) 330 ITR 0470, whereinthe Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in view of specificprovisions in sub-Sections 115JA and 115JB to the effect thatall other provisions of the Act shall apply to the MAT company,interest under sub-Sections 234B and 234C is payable on failureto pay advance tax in respect of tax payable under Section115JA/115JB.
4.Following the above referred decision, the appeal, filedby the Revenue, is allowed and the substantial question of lawis answered in favour of the Revenue. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True Copy//
abr/nsd
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal “D” Bench, Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)Coimbatore.
3.The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax,Special Range-I, Coimbatore.
+1cc to Mr.T.R.Senthil kumar, Advocate sr.no.77209+1cc to M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar, Advocate sr.no.77207
svn(co)nr 07/12/2018
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.
EaseValue