| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 1949 2014 SLD 1949 (2014) 365 ITR 84 |
Bombay High Court
IT APPEAL NOS. 3365 & 3371 OF 2010, APRIL 1, 2014
S. C. DHARMADHIKARI AND G.S. KULKARNI, JJ
A.R. Malhotra and Ms. Padma Divakar for the Appellant. Pankaj Toprani for the
Respondent.
IT APPEAL NOS. 3365 & 3371 OF 2010, APRIL 1, 2014
S. C. DHARMADHIKARI AND G.S. KULKARNI, JJ
A.R. Malhotra and Ms. Padma Divakar for the Appellant. Pankaj Toprani for the
Respondent.
Commissioner of IncomE tax, Central - II
v.
Cascade Holdings (P.) Ltd.
Law:
Section:
JUDGMENT 1. These appeal challenge the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 6.11.2009 in Income Tax Appeals No.6421 and 6422/Mum/2008. The Assessment year is 2004-05. The Appeals raise substantial questions of law are as under:- "6.1 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, in law, was right in holding that the assessee being a notified person under the Special Court (Trial of Offences relating to Transactions in Securities) Act,1992 is not liable to pay interest u/s.234 A, 234 B and 234 C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring the legal sanctity of Law that the interest chargeable under these sections is not only consequential but is mandatory in nature? 6.2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that interest under section 234 A, 234 B and 234 C is not chargeable in the assessee's case being notified person under Special Court (Trial of offences relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 without appreciating that the said Act has not ruled that the provisions of sections 234A, 234B and 234C are not applicable to the notified persons or they are exempted from the liability of payment of interest under these sections of Income Tax Act,1961 ?" 2. The submission of Mr.Toprani, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent- assessee is that the only issue involved in this appeal is not covered by the Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court rendered on 7.3.2012 in Income Tax Appeal no.3334 of 2010 (CIT. v. Divine Holdings (P.)Ltd. [2012] 209 Taxman 467/21 taxmann.com 538 (Bom.). This Judgment is relied upon by Mr.Malhotra and he submits that the point is covered by the same in favour of the Revenue. Mr.Malhotra submits that both the questions be answered in favour of the Revenue and the Tribunal's order be set aside. It is submitted by Shri.Toprani that the Division Bench rendering the judgment in "Divine Holdings (P.) Ltd." (supra) has failed to consider several judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court and the orders of this Court taking a view that when the assets and properties of the assessee like respondent are attached by…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492