Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore / Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1, Udupi v. Syndicate Bank
[Citation -2020-LL-1007-37]

Citation 2020-LL-1007-37
Appellant Name Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore / Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1, Udupi
Respondent Name Syndicate Bank
Court HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 07/10/2020
Assessment Year 1984-85
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags interest on delayed refund • payment of interest • question of law
Bot Summary: The subject matter of the appeal pertains to the Assessment year 1984-85. The appeal was admitted by a bench of this Court vide order dated 10.10.2014 on the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in dismissing the appeal preferred by Revenue by not appreciating the fact that interest on delayed refund interest cannot be granted since there is no specific provision in the Act for payment of interest on the amount of interest and in not considering the fact that the Department has not wrongly retained the refund amount 3 Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in relying upon the case of CIT v Sandvik Asia Ltd. wherein interest is not granted when it is due and granted subsequently 2. For the reasons assigned by us in the order passed today in I.T.A No.582/2013, the substantial questions of law are answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, the same fails and is hereby dismissed.


1 IN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 PRESENT HON BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE AND HON BLE MR. JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD I.T.A. NO.581 OF 2013 BETWEEN: 1. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX MANGALORE-575001. 2. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, UDUPI-576101. ... APPELLANTS (BY Mr. E.I. SANMATHI, ADV.,) AND: M/S. SYNDICATE BANK H.O. MANIPAL-576104. ... RESPONDENT (BY Mr. T. SURYANARAYANA, ADV.,) --- THIS ITA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF I.T. ACT, 1961 ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 12.07.2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.366/BANG/2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 1984-85, PRAYING THAT THIS HON BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO: (I) DECIDE FOREGOING QUESTION OF LAW AND/OR SUCH OTHER QUESTIONS OF LAW AS MAY BE FORMULATED BY HON BLE COURT AS DEEMED FIT. (II) SET ASIDE APPELLATE ORDER DATED 12-7-2013 PASSED IN ITA NO.366/BANG/2010 BY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, B BENCH, BANGALORE FOR A.Y.1984-85. 2 THIS ITA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, ALOK ARADHE J., DELIVERED FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act for short) has been preferred by revenue. subject matter of appeal pertains to Assessment year 1984-85. appeal was admitted by bench of this Court vide order dated 10.10.2014 on following substantial question of law: (i) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Tribunal was justified in law in dismissing appeal preferred by Revenue by not appreciating fact that interest on delayed refund interest cannot be granted since there is no specific provision in Act for payment of interest on amount of interest and in not considering fact that Department has not wrongly retained refund amount? 3 (ii) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case, Tribunal is right in law in relying upon case of CIT v Sandvik Asia Ltd. (SC) wherein interest is not granted when it is due and granted subsequently? 2. For reasons assigned by us in order passed today in I.T.A No.582/2013, substantial questions of law are answered against revenue and in favour of assessee. In result, we do not find any merit in this appeal, same fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE ss Commissioner of Income-tax, Mangalore / Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-1, Udupi v. Syndicate Bank
Report Error