The Commissioner of Income-tax, Thiruvananthapuram v. The Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd
[Citation -2017-LL-1204-5]

Citation 2017-LL-1204-5
Appellant Name The Commissioner of Income-tax, Thiruvananthapuram
Respondent Name The Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd.
Court HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 04/12/2017
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags regular assessment • assessed tax • excess tax • interest on refund
Bot Summary: The issue is no longer res integra having been answered by a Division Bench of this Court affirming the view of a learned Single Judge in W.A No.817/2010 dated 08.10.2013. It was held so: The argument is that going by the explanation to Section 244A the ITA 67/2012 :2: liability to pay interest is only in respect of the tax paid after a demand is made under section 156 of the Act. Any amount due to the assessee under the Act mentioned in section 244(1) clearly takes in all forms of refund, either self assessed tax or tax paid as per notice under Section 156 of the Act. As far as the explanation is concerned it only indicates the date on which the interest is liable to paid. That being the position, we do not think that there is any illegality or perversity in the judgment of the learned Single Judge. ITA 67/2012 :3: In the aforesaid circumstance, the assessee would be entitled to the interest on the excess tax paid. The question raised in the Income Tax Appeal is answered against the Department in favour of the assessee, affirming the order of the Tribunal, respectfully following the binding precedent cited above.


IN HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON MONDAY, 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939 ITA.No. 67 of 2012 AGAINST ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 568/2009 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 21-10-2011 APPELLANT/APPELLANT: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/APPELLANT: -------------- KERALA MINERALS AND METALS LTD. CHAVARA, KOLLAM-691 584. R1 SRI.P.K.R. MENON, SR COUNSEL GOVERNMENT OF INDIA BY ADV. SRI.A.KUMAR THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-12-2017, COURT ON SAME DAY DELIVERED FOLLOWING: IT APPEAL NO.67 OF 2012 ::2:: APPENDIX APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY of PROCEEDINGS OF ASSESSING OFFICER DATED 06.03.2007 ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 16.09.2009 ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DT 21.10.2011 ANNEXURE D: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN ITA NO. 493/2009 DT. 11.11.2009 ANNEXURE E: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WPC 26052/2004 DT 5.12.2008 RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE jma K. Vinod Chandran & Ashok Menon, JJ - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I.T Appeal No.67 of 2012 ----------------- ----------- Dated this 04th day of December, 2017 JUDGMENT K. Vinod Chandran, J issue raised in above appeal by department is as to whether assessee, who made self assessment of tax and paid tax, far in excess of that determined under regular assessment; is entitled to interest on refund. issue is no longer res integra having been answered by Division Bench of this Court affirming view of learned Single Judge in W.A No.817/2010 dated 08.10.2013. 2. Extracting Section 244A (1) (b) of Income Tax Act, 1961. It was held so: argument is that going by explanation to Section 244A (1) (b) ITA 67/2012 :2: liability to pay interest is only in respect of tax paid after demand is made under section 156 of Act. We do not think that such differentiation can be made to aforesaid provision and explanation does not give different meaning at all. Any amount due to assessee under Act mentioned in section 244(1) clearly takes in all forms of refund, either self assessed tax or tax paid as per notice under Section 156 of Act. As far as explanation is concerned it only indicates date on which interest is liable to paid. That being position, we do not think that there is any illegality or perversity in judgment of learned Single Judge. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. ITA 67/2012 :3: In aforesaid circumstance, assessee would be entitled to interest on excess tax paid. question raised in Income Tax Appeal is answered against Department in favour of assessee, affirming order of Tribunal, respectfully following binding precedent cited above. Sd/- K. Vinod Chandran, Judge Sd/- Ashok Menon, Judge jma //true copy// P.A to Judge Commissioner of Income-tax, Thiruvananthapuram v. Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd
Report Error